Florida First DCA Motion For A Written Opinion Pertaining To Injunction

LIL 2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORLI FIRST DISTRICT

Ep

JAN 44Mg!:35 Fjรง r -,

J

CASE NO. 1D12-1070

Mr. Daniel F. Walsh,

LT. Case No. 2012-151-DVXX

(Appellant) vs.

Ms. Diane L. Paull

(Appellee)

MOTION FOR A WRITTEN OPINION The Appellant, Mr. Daniel F. Walsh, request this court to issue a full written opinion in

order to facilitate his desire for discretionary review in the Supreme Court of Florida.

Rule 9.330(a) requires the movant for such relief to specifically state why, if a written

opinion were written, the Supreme Court would likely exercise its discretionary jurisdiction to grant further review. The Appellant feels it would be in the public's best interest with the facts and material evidence put forth in this appeal that the Florida Supreme Court use its discretionary authority in deciphering the fmal outcome of this

case. It appears the Florida First D.C.A. lacks the courage in upholding the United States Constitution by affirming this appeal involving an injunction for protection for repeat violence taken from a political blog without supplying a reason for doing so. In

fact, without a written opinion it appears this court is actually promoting criminal behavior within the court system itself. It is evident that by affirming the lower courts decision without a written opinion one may view this decision as not only

counterproductive in reforming the Florida laws that govern Domestic Violence and all subsections thereof, but appears to be deliberate. The Florida First DCA has apparently

chosen to sweep such important legislative reform under the carpet, thus making one

think perhaps the "culture of corruption" stretches beyond the Appellant's hometown of Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, a.k.a.. "kids for cash".

Why a written opinion would be of great public importance is listed as follows: 1).

Included within the body of both the Appellants Initial Brief and Mr. Walsh's Reply

Brief is material evidence of perjury and fraud over the past (4) years orchestrated by the Petitioner of this injunction, and illustrates the real motive(s) of why this injunction was filed in the first place. This is the main issue at hand, and this decision is directly

related to on going proceedings that are now pending in another jurisdiction.

2). This is not your typical injunction for protection against repeat violence case which makes it of great public importance, and would suggest further review by the Florida Supreme Court. Mr. Walsh was ordered to have a psychiatric evaluation based on

comments from a political blog of 3 1/2 years. If this injunction taken from a public blog can be construed as being threatening and dangerous, then Mr. Walsh ask this court in its

own written opinion to show case law that would substantiate such fmdings. Are such comments on ones blog which the Appellee herself commented, any more threatening

than a local Jacksonville police officer who recently commented publicly that he would

volunteer to shoot the President of the United States (2012-11-16/story/jacksonville-

detective-resigns-after-threats-directed-president)?

2.

3). A written opinion by this court will benefit many innocent people particularly men who are falsely accused in cases of Domestic Violence. The majority of all Domestic Violence Injunctions during divorce in Florida are bogus, and the Florida Legislature is well aware of this (http ://www. fathersandfamilies. orglhistorv-strategy-and-missionl).

4)

A written opinion is of great importance to the Media, and their interest in this case

since we are now violating ones civil liberties, and the right of free speech. Also, we

mustn't forget the Federal Bureau of Investigation who were made aware of the

Appellee's deceptive behavior years before this injunction was issued. Finally, we must not forget those families with children that must witness a Mother or Father taken from their home because of another's hidden agenda based on false accusations.

5)

A written opinion would be of great public importance for all to see in determining

whether the Florida First DCA itself is complicitous in this case. Mr Walsh could have

motion to vacate this injunction as the Higher Court well knows, but instead elected to see what this Higher Court would do in this situation. The issue we are confronted with is the factual evidence this court has received showing that the Appellee, Diane Paul! has

violated the law prior to when this injunction was filed which in essence has created a pattern of unethical behavior for which one cannot ignore. And yet, it is the Appellant

that is being punished as if he were the perpetrator in all of this. Our intentions are to prevent the abusiveness on the part of petitioners who use these injunctions as swords rather than shields, and a written opinion would ultimately reverse such threatening behavior, thus setting a precedence for future cases.

3,

Wherefore, Mr. Walsh respectfully ask this court for an order allowing Mr. Walsh (appellant) a Motion For A Written Opinion based on Ms Paull's (Appellee) criminal

behavior, and the opportunity of reforming Florida Statute(s) 741.30 and 784.046.

Daniel F. Walsh (appellant) 2656 Stern Drive South Atlantic Beach, Florida 32233 (904) 235-1764 Date: December 28, 2012

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify a copy of the foregoing was sent by U. S. first class mail to the (Appellee),

Ms. Diane L. Paull, 2510 South 2' Street, Jacksonville Beach, Florida 32250 Special Agent Joe Noone, The Federal Bureau of Investigation, P.O. Box 1104, Scranton, Pennsylvania 18503 First Coast News, 1070 East Adams Street, Jacksonville, FL 32202