LAKE WORTH BROADCASTING CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
HISPANIC BROADCASTING, INC., 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.
Lake Worth Broadcasting appealed a trial court's denial of attorney's fees after successfully moving to dissolve a wrongfully issued temporary injunction obtained by Hispanic Broadcasting. The appellate court reversed, holding that a defendant is entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees as damages when a temporary injunction is dissolved based on wrongful issuance, and remanded for the trial court to award such fees.
A defendant is entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees incurred in securing the dissolution of a wrongfully issued temporary injunction as damages, particularly when the trial court dissolves the injunction based on a claim of wrongful issuance and passes on the merits of the improper issuance claim. The defendant's notice of the injunction hearing does not preclude recovery of such fees.
[1] A defendant is entitled to damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred in securing the dissolution of a wrongfully issued temporary injunction.
[2] Attorney's fees incurred to set aside a temporary injunction are recoverable damages when the injunction is dissolved based on a claim of wrongful issuance.
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“a defendant is entitled to any damages sustained by him as a result of a wrongfully issued temporary injunction after the trial court, as here, dissolves the temporary injunction based on the claim of wrongful issuance; such damages include reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the defendant to secure the dissolution of the wrongfully issued temporary injunction”
Establishes the core holding that attorney's fees are recoverable as damages when a temporary injunction is wrongfully issued and dissolved
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHispanic Broadcasting obtained an ex parte temporary injunction against Lake Worth Broadcasting and posted a $5,000 bond as required. Lake Worth Broad…
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 Attorney'S Fees As Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a trial court order denying an application for attorney’s fees as damages incurred by the defendant Lake Worth Broadcasting Corporation in successfully moving to set aside an ex parte temporary injunction previously issued at the behest of the plaintiff Hispanic Broadcasting, Inc.
The trial court required the plaintiff, as a condition of the temporary injunction, to post a $5,000 bond for the payment of any damages and costs sustained by the defendant as a result of the temporary injunction. Subsequently, the defendant moved to dissolve the temporary injunction on the basis that (1) there had been a lack of notice on the temporary injunction hearing, and (2) the temporary injunction had been wrongfully issued for a variety of reasons.
The trial court granted the motion and dissolved the temporary injunction, but denied the defendant any damages in the form of attorney’s fees because the defendant was “on notice” of the temporary injunction hearing.
We reverse.
The law is clear that a defendant is entitled to any damages sustained by him as a result of a wrongfully issued temporary injunction after the trial court, as here, dissolves the temporary injunction based on the claim of wrongful issuance; such damages include reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by the defendant to secure the dissolution of the wrongfully issued temporary injunction. National Surety Co. v. Willys-Overland, Inc., 103 Fla. 738, 138 So. 24 (1931); Braun v. Intercontinental Bank, 452 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), pet. for review denied, 462 So. 2d 1106 (Fla.1985); Knight v. Global Contact Lens, Inc., 319 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), cert. denied, 336 So. 2d 1182 (Fla.1976).
The holding in Oakwood Manor, Inc. v. Eck, 358 So. 2d 585, 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978), relied on by plaintiff, is inapplicable to this case as (a) the dissolution of the temporary injunction herein was sought solely on the basis that the subject injunction was wrongfully issued in the first instance, and (b) the trial court obviously passed on the merits of the improper issuance claim by granting the motion to dissolve. Under these circumstances, it is clear that the defendant herein was entitled to recover, as damages, any reasonable attorney’s fees which he incurred in seeking to set aside the temporary injunction; indeed, the required bond posted as a condition for the issuance of the temporary injunction was intended to cover just such damages. See Aviation Investments, Inc. v. Johanson, 177 So. 2d 369 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); United Bonding Insurance Co. of Indianapolis v. Presidential Insurance Co., 155 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963); Roger Dean Chevrolet, Inc. v. Painters, Decorators & Paperhangers of America, Local No. 452, 155 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.610(b).
The order under review is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to award reasonable attorney’s fees to the defendant, which fees were incurred in an effort to set aside the temporary injunction in this cause.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shea v. Cent. Diagnostic Servs., Inc., 552 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…ge intended to deny the defendants the opportunity and right to seek recourse for any damages resulting from the issuance of the temporary injunction. This right should not be denied. See Lake Worth Broadcasting Corp. v. Hispanic Broadcasting, Inc., 495 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). An aggrieved party is entitled to damages resulting from the wrongful issuance of an injunction. The dissolution of a temporary injunction upon the merits 1 constitutes an adjudication that it was wrongfully issued.2 National Sur…
-
Aerospace Welding, Inc. v. Southstream Exhaust & Welding, Inc., 824 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…escribe in reasonable detail the act or acts restrained ...,” in violation of rule 1.610(a)(2) and (c). We also affirm the issue of attorney’s fees and costs raised by appellant without comment. See Lake Worth Broad. Corp. v. Hispanic Broad., Inc., 495 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); see also Shea v. Cent. Diagnostic Servs., Inc., 552 So. 2d 344, (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). AFFIRMED. STEVENSON and MAY, JJ„ concur.…
-
City OF Treasure Island v. Provident Mgmt. Corp. & Laurence N. Belair, 738 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…nd we find no preserved, reversible error affecting this award.1 Likewise, the awards of attorneys’ fees are supportable in light of the long and difficult battle over the injunction. See Lake Worth Broadcasting Corp. v. Hispanic Broadcasting, Inc., 495 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). II. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY The parties present diametrically opposed positions on this issue. The City maintains that it has total immunity, whereas Provident and Belair argue that immunity is irrelevant. Although the supreme court…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Nat'l Sur. Co. v. Willys-Overland, Inc., 103 Fla. 738 (Fla. 1931)
- Roger Dean Chevrolet, Inc. v. Painters, 155 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- United Bonding Ins. Co. OF Indianapolis v. Presidential Ins. Co., 155 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Braun v. Intercontinental Bank, 452 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Aviation Invs., Inc. v. Johanson, 177 So. 2d 369 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Oakwood Manor, Inc. v. ECK, 358 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- Knight v. Global Contact Lens, Inc., 319 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)