2d DCA 2010) (finding that a pushing incident that occurred three years before the injunction was filed was not sufficient to support the issuance of an injunction against domestic violence), with Giallanza, 787 So.2d at 163 (finding that allegations of actual violence eight to ten years before the petition was filed were sufficient to support the issuance of the injunction when coupled with allegations that the husband had “recently been very angry and verbally abusive ... due to the parties’ impending divorce”). Further, the Former Wife did not present sufficient evidence to establish that she had an objectively reasonable basis to believe she was in imminent danger of becoming the victim of any act of domestic violence. The only evidence presented at the hea (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (<HOLDING>); Kopelovich v. Kopelovich, 793 So.2d 31, 33
holding that injunction was improperly issued when there was no evidence of actual violence or threats of violence holding that petitioners who deliberately violated injunction without first attempting to dissolve injunction were properly convicted of criminal con tempt holding that injunction was not properly issued based on threats to make the petitioners life miserable holding that the injunction did not constitute a claim holding that the donovan rule applies regardless of whether the injunction is issued before or after the federal court filing