INDUSTRIAL WASTE SERVICES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
FAIRCLOTH SANITATION, INC., A FLORIDA 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.
Florida appellate court reversed a temporary injunction against Industrial Waste Services for failure to specify reasons as required by procedural rule.
A temporary injunction order must specify the reasons for its entry as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(c), and an order lacking such specification is defective and must be reversed.
[1] A temporary injunction order must specify the reasons for its entry under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(c), and failure to do so renders the order defective and s…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIndustrial Waste Services appealed a temporary injunction granted by the trial court that prohibited it from publishing statements that Faircloth Sani…
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 Appellate Review Of Injunctions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Industrial Waste Services, Inc., appeals an order granting appellee, Faireloth Sanitation, Inc.’s, motion for a temporary injunction. We reverse.
The trial court granted the temporary injunction and entered its order stating:
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Defendant, INDUSTRIAL WASTE SERVICES, INC., is hereby enjoined and restrained as follows:
a. It’s [sic] officers, employees, agents and representatives are prohibited from publishing and/or communicating any statements that Plaintiff, FAIRCLOTH SANITATION, INC., is going out of business.
b. That the Defendant shall not publish and/or communicate through its officers, employees, agents and/or representatives that it has the exclusive right to collect trash, garbage and/or rubbish in the South Dade County area.
2. This injunction is conditioned upon Plaintiff posting a $2,500.00 bond.
The injunction is defective because the order fails to specify the reasons for its entry, as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(c). See City of Homestead v. Ramirez, 621 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Pearson & Maluso, M.D., P.A v. Bott, 584 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); City of Miami v. Coll, 546 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Accordingly, the order below must be reversed and the cause remanded for dissolution of the temporary injunction.
Reversed and remanded.
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 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 applies to both temporary and permanent injunctions. See Hasley v. Harrell, 971 So. 2d 149, 152 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (reclassifying a temporary injunction as a per…
-
Aligned Bayshore Marina, LLC v. Am. Watersports Coconut Grove, LLC, 207 So. 3d 331 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…der in this case does not comply with either requirement. Meinstein v. Travel Etc., Inc., 442 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). The order on appeal fails to specify the reasons for its entry. Indust. Waste Servs., Inc. v. Faircloth Sanitation, Inc., 643 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). While the order states that it is being entered “to maintain the status quo as currently prevailing,” this is insufficient, because that is the general function of every temporary injunction. City of Sunny Isles Beach v. Temple B…
-
Porto v. Walker, 273 So. 3d 1100 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)….610(c). Additionally, rule 1.610(b) contains a bond requirement for all temporary injunctions. We reverse the subject injunction order because it fails to meet the requisites of rule 1.610. Indus. Waste Servs. Inc. v. Faircloth Sanitation, Inc., 643 So. 2d 688, 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (concluding that “[t]he injunction is defective because the order fails to specify the reasons for its entry”). Because of our holding, we need not, and therefore do not, address the other alleged infirmities in the challe…
Authorities Cited
- Pearson & Maluso, M.D., P.A. v. Bott, 584 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)
- City OF Miami v. Coll, 546 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- City OF Homestead v. Ramirez, 621 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- Magic PAN Int'l, Inc. v. The Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am., 621 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)