ED KALIS MEMORIAL SERVICES, LLC, AND ED KALIS, APPELLANTS,
v.
MCINTEE HOLDINGS, LLC, D/B/A KALIS FUNERAL HOMES, 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.
Ed Kalis, Jr. appealed a modified temporary injunction that severely restricted his use of his own name in identifying himself as a licensed funeral director for his competing funeral business. The court reversed the overly broad restrictions, holding that while the manner of using one's own name may be regulated, a complete prohibition on using his name in advertising and signage was an abuse of discretion.
The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by imposing overly broad restrictions on Kalis's right to use his own name. While a court may regulate the manner in which someone uses their own name in business, it cannot completely prohibit such use. The restrictions on Kalis's name in advertising, signage, and website URLs were overly broad, but the court agreed that Kalis's name should not be the predominant feature in signage or advertisements.
[1] A court reviews temporary injunctions for abuse of discretion.
[2] The right to use one's personal name in business is subject to rules regarding unfair competition, and the manner of its use may be regulated by injunction.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“the right to use a personal name in a business even one's own, is subject to the general rules in regard to unfair competition ... While the use of one's own name cannot be absolutely enjoined, nevertheless the manner of using it may be regulated by injunction.”
Establishes the foundational principle that personal names in business cannot be absolutely prohibited but their manner of use can be regulated.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Kalis family opened Kalis Funeral Home in 1959. Ed Kalis, Sr. sold the business in 1994 and signed a ten-year non-compete agreement but continued …
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 Unfair Competition cases and more on FLexlaw
POLEN, J.
Appellant, Ed Kalis, Jr., appeals a non-final order modifying a temporary injunction in favor of Appellee, Mclntee Holdings, LLC (“Mclntee”). The order denied Kalis the right to use his name identifying himself as the licensed funeral home director of Edwards Memorial Services in advertising, except in limited situations. We do not consider the temporary injunction in this appeal, only the order modifying the temporary injunction. We find that portions of the order modifying the temporary injunction are overly broad, and reverse and remand to the trial court with instructions to enter a modified order consistent with this opinion.
The Kalis family originally opened the Kalis Funeral Home (“Home”) in 1959. In 1994, Ed Kalis, Sr., sold the business and signed a ten-year non-compete agreement. Both Kalis, Sr., and his son, Ed Kalis, Jr., continued to work at the funeral home. In 2003, the initial purchaser of the Home sold the business to Mcln-tee. In 2004, upon the expiration of the non-compete agreement, Kalis stopped working at the Home. Soon after, Kalis began operating a business by the name of Ed Kalis Memorial Services (“Memorial”) as a funeral, burial, cremation and mortu-arial business. The Memorial was located approximately 100 yards from the Home, in a single family home that had been in the Kalis family since 1965. Mclntee filed a complaint against Kalis and was granted a temporary injunction against Kalis. Kal-is then changed the name of the Memorial to Edwards Cremation & Funeral Services, but further issues ensued, leading to a request for clarification of the temporary injunction. The order modifying the temporary injunction stated, in pertinent part:
The Defendant, ED KALIS, may use his name and photograph when identifying himself as the Licensed Funeral Director on the website for Edwards Cremation & Funeral Services. The Uniform Resource Locator (URL) for the website may not contain the name “Kalis” in the URL.
The Defendant, ED KALIS, may not place his name identifying himself as Licensed Funeral Director on any other signage for Edwards Cremation & Funeral Services in Broward County, Florida.
The Defendant, ED KALIS, may not use his name identifying himself as the Licensed Funeral Director for Edwards Cremation & Funeral Services on any advertising, including, but not limited to, the BellSouth Yellow Pages, or any other advertising and/or promotional materials to be circulated in Broward County, Florida, except as provided above.
“This court reviews temporary injunctions for abuse of discretion.” Colucci v. Kar Kare Auto. Group, Inc., 918 So. 2d 431, 435 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). “[T]he right to use a personal name in a business even one’s own, is subject to the general rules in regard to unfair competition ... While the use of one’s own name cannot be absolutely enjoined, nevertheless the manner of using it may be regulated by injunction.” Gottdiener v. Joe’s Rest., 111 Fla. 741, 149 So. 646, 647 (1933).
We find that the trial court’s restrictions on Kalis’s right to use his name in identifying himself as the licensed funeral director of the Memorial, whether in advertising or signage, are overly broad, and therefore, an abuse of discretion. See Anastasi Masonry Corp. v. Anastasi Bros. Corp., 541 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). However, we would agree with a holding that Kalis’s name should not be the predominant feature of the signage or in the advertisement. We also find that the trial court abused its discretion in determining that Kalis could not use his name in the URL for his website. We find that the use of Kalis’s name in identifying himself as the licensed funeral director of the Memorial, whether on signage, in advertising, or on the internet, is not likely to cause confusion in the mind of the public, or to work a fraud on the Home by diverting business to the Memorial. See McGhan v. McGhan, 115 Fla. 414, 155 So. 653 (1934).
We reverse the portions of the order modifying the temporary injunction detailed above, and remand to the trial court with instructions to enter a modified order in accordance with this opinion.
STONE and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Colucci v. EAR Rare Auto. Grp., Inc., 918 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Gottdiener v. Joe's Rest., Inc., 111 Fla. 741 (Fla. 1933)
- Mrs. Frank P. McGhan v. McGhan, 115 Fla. 414 (Fla. 1934)
- Anastasi Masonry Corp. v. Anastasi Bros. Corp., 541 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)