DAVID BRAUN D/B/A MARTI INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
INTERCONTINENTAL BANK, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this appeal from a damages assessment on an injunction bond, the court held that while the trial court properly awarded damages for the wrongful issuance of a stay granted by the appellate court, it erred in including attorney's fees for services rendered in responding to the motion for stay itself rather than limiting fees to efforts to dissolve the stay.
The appellate court may assess damages against an injunction bond for a wrongfully issued stay because by affirming the trial court's denial of the injunction, it implicitly determined the injunction was improper. However, attorney's fees awarded as damages must be limited to services rendered in undoing the wrongful injunction, not fees for responding to the motion for stay itself.
[1] Damages recoverable on an injunction bond include attorney's fees incurred in dissolving the wrongful injunction.
[2] Attorney's fees awarded as damages for the wrongful issuance of an injunction must be restricted to services rendered in undoing the wrongful injunction.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“By affirming the order below, we implicitly approved the trial court's finding that appellant was not entitled to a temporary injunction.”
Establishes that the appellate court's affirmance implicitly determined the stay was improper, allowing damages to be assessed against the bond.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Braun sued to rescind an irrevocable letter of credit and sought an injunction. The trial court denied the temporary injunction. Appellant a…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Injunction Bond Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
FERGUSON, Judge.
This appeal is from a trial court order assessing damages in the form of attorney’s fees under an injunction bond pursuant to Section 60.07, Florida Statutes (1983). Appellant’s main contention is that since the injunction was entered by order of the appellate court in the form of a stay, only the appellate court could have decided, as a basis for awarding damages, that it issued improperly.
Appellant commenced this action against appellee-Bank and two co-defendants seeking rescission and injunction of an irrevoca ble letter of credit and contract for the sale of plumbing materials. The trial court entered an order denying a temporary injunction of the letter of credit. That order was appealed. In connection with the appeal, appellant requested a stay which we granted upon the condition that appellant post an injunction bond in the circuit court to cover damages, inclusive of attorney’s fees, in the event an injunction was determined inappropriate. After a full hearing, we affirmed without opinion the trial court’s denial of the temporary injunction.
By affirming the order below, we implicitly approved the trial court’s finding that appellant was not entitled to a temporary injunction. A review of the record of the prior appeal in this case, which is permissible, see Nichols v. Tarsches, 429 So. 2d 409, 412 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 440 So. 2d 353 (Fla.1983) (citing Rogers v. State ex rel. Board of Public Instruction of Alachua County, 156 Fla. 161, 23 So. 2d 154 (1945)), confirms that the issue decided adversely to appellant was whether there was irreparable harm and lack of an adequate remedy at law, both prerequisites to a temporary injunction. See Wilson v. Sandstrom, 317 So. 2d 732 (Fla.1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1053, 96 S.Ct. 782, 46 L.Ed.2d 642 (1976). Therefore, appellee may properly recover against the bond any damages which resulted from the issuance of the stay.1 See Roger Dean Chevrolet, Inc. v. Painters, Decorators & Paperhangers of America, Local No. 452, 155 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963).
Appellant correctly maintains, however, that it was error to grant attorney’s fees for services rendered in reviewing and responding to the motion for stay filed in this court. Attorney’s fees awarded as damages for the wrongful issuance of an injunction must be restricted to services rendered in undoing a wrongful injunction. Aviation Investments, Inc. v. Johanson, 177 So. 2d 369 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); United Bonding Insurance Co. v. Presidential Insurance Co., 155 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963). The award of fees was proper only insofar as it was based on appellee’s efforts to dissolve the stay. On remand, the trial court should divide and allocate the fees assessed against appellee accordingly.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
. Damages in an action on an injunction bond include attorney’s fees. United Bonding Insurance Co. v. Presidential Insurance Co., 155 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Parker Tampa TWO, Inc. v. Somerset Dev. Corp., 544 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 1989)…ly whether the petitioning party was unentitled to injunc- [*1022] tive relief. See National Surety Co. v. Willys-Overland, Inc., 103 Fla. 738, 138 So. 24 (1931); Sewell v. Huffstetler, 83 Fla. 629, 93 So. 162 (1922); Braun v. Intercontinental Bank, 452 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), review denied, 462 So. 2d 1106 (Fla.1985); Tracy. In the instant case, sufficient evidence exists to support the trial court’s finding that the injunction should not have been issued. Somerset alleges that Parker was unentitled…
-
Hathcock v. Hathcock, 533 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…determined by the trial court based upon the erroneous issuance of the temporary order. As authority, appellant cites to Carpenters District Council of Jacksonville v. Waybright, 282 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973) and Braun v. Intercontinental Bank, 452 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1984). Both cases rely upon Section 60.07, Florida Statutes,4 in holding that a defendant is entitled to recover damages (including attorney’s fees) which resulted from the issuance of the temporary injunction. However, fatal to appell…
-
B.G.H. Ins. Syndicate, Inc. v. Presidential Fire & Cas. Co., 549 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…ef based upon its claim that BGH was making false statements to Sun Bank in order to secure pay-down of the letters. Irreparable harm and lack of an adequate remedy at law are both prerequisites to injunctive relief. Braun v. Intercontinental Bank, 452 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), review denied, 462 So. 2d 1106 (Fla.1985); see also Wilson v. Sandstrom, 317 So. 2d 732 (Fla.1975), cert. denied, Adler v. Sandstrom, 423 U.S. 1053, 96 S.Ct. 782, 46 L.Ed.2d 642 (1976). For in-junctive relief purposes, irreparabl…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wilson v. Sandstrom, 317 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 1975)
- Terminal Flour Mills Co. v. Helix Milling Co., 423 U.S. 1053 (U.S. 1976)
- A/S Arcadia v. Gulf Ins. Co., 423 U.S. 1053 (U.S. 1976)
- Roger Dean Chevrolet, Inc. v. Painters, 155 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Petroleum Carrier Corp. v. Standard OIL Co. OF Ky., 156 Fla. 161 (Fla. 1945)
- Rogers v. State Ex rel. Bd. of Pub. Instruction of Alachua Cnty. Fla., 156 Fla. 161 (Fla. 1945)
- United Bonding Ins. Co. OF Indianapolis v. Presidential Ins. Co., 155 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Aviation Invs., Inc. v. Johanson, 177 So. 2d 369 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Nichols v. Ellis S. Tarsches, 429 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)