STEVEN WIGDOR, APPELLANT,
v.
MARK WIGDOR, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2005-10-12
No. 3D05-919
Before COPE, C.J., and FLETCHER and SUAREZ, JJ.
917 So. 2d 898 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2005) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Steven Wigdor appeals an interlocutory order which preserves the status quo of the assets and books and records of a business operated by him and his brother, Mark Wigdor. As we view this order as a temporary injunction, we remand the case to the trial court for the setting of an appropriate injunction bond pursuant to Rule 1.610(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

Affirmed as modified, and remanded.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • City OF Miami Beach v. Kuoni Destination Mgmt., Inc., 81 So. 3d 530 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)
    …610. For this reason too, the injunction order must be reversed. See SoBeach Rentals, Inc. v. Shelbome Ocean Beach Hotel, 37 So. 3d 982, 983 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (injunction bond is required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610); Wigdor v. Wigdor, 917 So. 2d 898, 898 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (same). For these reasons, I would reverse the trial court’s entry of an injunction in this case.…
  • Fleming v. State, 12 So. 3d 307 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 775.082(9)(a)l.p., Fla. Stat. (1999); see also Eubanks v. State, 917 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). GROSS, C.J., DAMOORGIAN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw