GLEN STADING, APPELLANT,
v.
EQUILEASE CORPORATION, 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.
The court held that a temporary injunction was improperly granted because the appellee failed to allege or prove an inadequate remedy at law.
Appellant received insurance proceeds for damage to a leased truck owned by appellee but kept the money instead of repairing the truck. Appellee sough…
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 Inadequate Remedy At Law cases and more on FLexlaw
GLICKSTEIN, Judge.
This is an appeal from a non-final order granting a temporary injunction. We reverse and remand.
Appellant received insurance monies for damage done to a leased truck owned by appellee. Appellant kept the monies instead of paying for repair of the truck. The trial court granted appellee’s petition for emergency relief which requested that the trial court grant a temporary injunction, requiring appellant to deposit the amount of the insurance monies in an account during the pendency of the suit for damages.
To support the award of a temporary injunction, a party must prove (1) irreparable harm, (2) a clear legal right, (3) an inadequate remedy at law, and (4) consideration of the public interest. Dania Jai Alai International, Inc., v. Murua, 375 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). In the present case appellee did not allege in his pleadings that he had no adequate remedy at law. The hearing consisted solely of the arguments of opposing counsel, which is, of course, not evidence. Leon Shaffer Golnick Advertising, Inc. v. Cedar, 423 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). The trial court apparently believed appellant had no adequate remedy at law because it feared that otherwise it was unlikely appellee would recover on his complaint for damages. We believe this confuses the question of the ability to obtain a judgment with the question of the ability to satisfy a judgment. The correct test is, could a judgment be obtained in a proceeding at law, and not, would the judgment procure pecuniary compensation. Oxford International Bank and Trust, Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 374 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1979). Since appellee has not shown he has no adequate remedy at law, we find the trial court erred in granting the temporary injunction.
HERSEY, C.J., and DELL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Konover Realty Assocs., Ltd. v. Mladen, 511 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…5), or indeed for any restraint upon the use of a defendant’s unrestricted assets3 prior to the entry of judgment. Stewart v. Manget, 132 Fla. 498, 181 So. 370 (1938); Leight v. Berkman, 483 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Stading v. Equilease Corp., 471 So. 2d 1379 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Ciabotti v. Milo, 432 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Supreme Service Station Corp. v. TeleCredit Service Center, Inc., 424 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The rule has been specifically applied, as on general principles it must b…
-
Leight v. Berkman, 483 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…against the disposition of a defendant’s assets simply may not be granted upon the ground that their preservation is required to satisfy a subsequent money judgment.1 Stewart v. Manget, 132 Fla. 498, 181 So. 370 (1938); Stading v. Equilease Corp., 471 So. 2d 1379 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Ciabotti v. Milo, 432 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Supreme Service Station Corp. v. Telecredit Service Center, Inc., 424 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Oxford International Bank and Trust, Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner…
-
Med. Facilities Dev., Inc. v. Little ARCH Creek Props., Inc., 656 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…orary injunction. The State of Florida, Agency for Health Care Admin, v. Continental Car Services, Inc., 650 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Minimatic, Inc. v. Westinghouse Elect. Corp., 494 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Stading v. Equilease Corp., 471 So. 2d 1379 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). When a trial court believes that irreparable harm will result, it may grant a plaintiff extraordinary [*1306] relief in the form of a temporary injunction. When such relief is granted a defendant is entitled to protection agains…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Leon Shaffer Golnick Advertising, Inc. v. Cedar, 423 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Oxford Int'l Bank & Tr., Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, 374 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Harris v. Fla. Dep't OF Labor & Emp. Sec., 374 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Dania JAI Alai Int'l, Inc. v. Murua, 375 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)