GOLD COAST CHEMICAL CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
JOEL GOLDBERG, MICHELE GOLDBERG, AND AMERICAN DIVERSIFIED PRODUCTS, INC., APPELLEES
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.
Gold Coast Chemical Corporation's appeal of the trial court's denial of a temporary injunction to enforce a non-compete covenant against a former employee was dismissed because Gold Coast failed to demonstrate clear abuse of discretion.
A party appealing the denial of a temporary injunction must demonstrate that the trial court's ruling was clearly improper, and Gold Coast failed to meet this heavy burden.
[1] A party appealing the denial of a temporary injunction must demonstrate clear abuse of discretion, which requires showing that the trial court's early estimate of likelih…
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 intelligenceGold Coast Chemical Corporation sought to enforce a covenant not to compete against its former employee and moved for a temporary injunction in trial …
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 Enforcement Of Covenant Not To Compete cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In the trial court, Gold Coast Chemical Corporation seeks to enforce a covenant not to compete against its former employee.
The trial court denied Gold Coast’s motion for a temporary injunction. Gold Coast appeals. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(B).
A trial court’s ruling on a temporary injunction comes to the appellate court with a presumption of correctness, reversible only upon a showing of a clear abuse of discretion. M.G.K. Partners v. Cavallo, 515 So. 2d 368, 369 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987).
A temporary injunction does not decide the merits of a ease; no full hearing has been conducted. To rule on a temporary injunction, the trial court must, early in the case, estimate the likelihood of the Plaintiff prevailing on the merits and securing a permanent injunction. See Reinhold Constr., Inc. v. City Council of Vero Beach, 429 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).
These are some of the reasons that a party appealing the denial of a temporary injunction has the heavy burden of demonstrating that the trial court’s ruling was clearly improper. See 3299 N. Fed. Highway, Inc. v. Board of County Comm’rs of Broward County, 646 So. 2d 215, 220 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
Gold Coast has failed to meet its heavy burden in this case.
GLICKSTEIN, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Infinity Radio Inc. v. Whitby, 780 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…use by a party’s assignee. This appeal followed. A trial court’s ruling on a motion for a temporary injunction is clothed in a presumption of correctness, subject to reversal only for a clear abuse of discretion. Gold Coast Chem. Corp. v. Goldberg, 668 So. 2d 326, 327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). In order to obtain a temporary injunction, a party must prove the following: (1) that it will suffer irreparable harm unless the status quo is maintained; (2) that it has no adequate remedy at law; (3) that it has a substan…
-
Benemerito & Flores, M.D.'S, P.A. v. Zeidy Roche, M.D., 751 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…olated the terms of the contract by lessening the bonus due to Dr. Zeidy Roche. This breached the contract as shown in Bradley v. Health Coalition, Inc., 687 So. 2d 329 (Fla.App. 3 Dist. 1997). As we stated in Gold Coast Chemical Corp. v. Goldberg, 668 So. 2d 326, 327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996): A trial court’s ruling on a temporary injunction comes to the appellate court with a presumption of correctness, reversible only upon a showing of a dear abuse of discretion. M.G.K. Partners v. Cavallo, 515 So. 2d 368, 369…
-
Rollins, Inc. v. Parker, 755 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…uring a permanent injunction. These are some of the reasons that a party appealing the denial of a temporary injunction has the heavy burden of demonstrating that the trial court’s ruling was clearly improper. Gold Coast Chemical Corp. v. Goldberg, 668 So. 2d 326, 327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). A party seeking the entry of a preliminary injunction must demonstrate: 1. Irreparable harm; 2. A substantial likelihood of success stemming from a demonstrably clear legal right; 3. An inadequate remedy at law; and 4.…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Reinhold Constr., Inc. v. City Council FOR the City OF Vero Beach, 429 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- 3299 N. Fed. Hwy., Inc. v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Broward Cnty., 646 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- M.G.K. P'rs v. Cavallo, 515 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)