RAYMOND ELLIS GREEN, APPELLANT,
v.
JOAN LILIAN STUDEN, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1993-08-25
No. 93-0344
ANSTEAD, GUNTHER and WARNER, JJ., concur.
622 So. 2d 197 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1993) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

REVERSED. We agree with appellant that the trial court erred in entering a temporary injunction without making the findings required under Rule 1.610(c) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and then in denying dissolution thereof without conducting any evidentiary hearing. Upon remand, any orders entered should be in compliance with Rule 1.610(c). See Russo v. Romano, 591 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Allegra Enterprises, Inc. v. Fairchild, 455 So. 2d 1073 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).

ANSTEAD, GUNTHER and WARNER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Premier LAB Supply, Inc. v. Chemplex Indus., Inc., 10 So. 3d 202 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)
    …e in reasonable detail the act or acts restrained without reference to a pleading or another document ...” Failure to include specific reasons for issuing the injunction has resulted in reversals of temporary injunctions. See, e.g., Green v. Studen, 622 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 4th [*207] DCA 1993); Smith v. Crider, 932 So. 2d 393, 398 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Indus. Waste Servs., Inc. v. Faircloth Sanitation, Inc., 643 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). Based on the clear wording of the rule, the specificity requirement appl…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw