KENNAN DANDAR AND DANDAR & DANDAR, P.A., APPELLANTS,
v.
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION, INC., 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.
Kennan Dandar and his law firm appealed a circuit court order finding them in willful civil contempt, imposing civil penalties, and awarding $50,000 in damages to the Church of Scientology. The appellate court reversed the damages award, which the Church conceded was erroneous, but affirmed the contempt finding and civil penalties on other grounds.
The court reversed the $50,000 damages award against Dandar because the Church conceded the circuit court erred in imposing it. The court affirmed the contempt finding and civil penalties, as Dandar's remaining arguments were either procedurally barred or without merit.
[1] A damages award may be reversed when conceded by the prevailing party to be erroneous.
[2] Appellate review of a contempt order does not permit a challenge to a prior, unappealed order that the contempt order seeks to enforce.
Previewing 2 of 5 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 Church concedes — with commendable candor — that the circuit court erred in imposing the $50,000 damages award against Dandar.”
Establishes the basis for reversal of the damages award portion of the order.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe circuit court found Dandar in willful civil contempt of court and imposed civil penalties against Dandar and his firm. The court also awarded $50,…
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 Estoppel By Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
Kennan Dandar and Dandar & Dandar, P.A. (collectively, Dandar), appeal the circuit court’s order finding Dandar in willful civil contempt of court, imposing civil penalties against them, and awarding $50,000 in damages against Dandar and in favor of the Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization, Inc. (the Church). The Church concedes — with commendable candor — that the circuit court erred in imposing the $50,000 damages award against Dandar. Accordingly, we reverse the circuit court’s order to the extent that it awarded $50,000 in damages against Dan-dar and in favor of the Church.
Dandar’s remaining arguments are either procedurally barred or are otherwise without merit. See M.C.G. v. Hillsborough Cnty. Sch. Bd., 927 So.2d 224, 226-27 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (discussing the doctrine of collateral estoppel, also referred to as issue preclusion and estoppel by judgment); see also Fla. Dep’t of Transp. v. Juliano, 801 So.2d 101, 105-08 (Fla.2001) (applying the doctrine of law of the case); Specialty Rests. Corp. v. Elliott, 924 So.2d 834, 837-38 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (same); Hunter v. Dennies Contracting Co., 693 So.2d 615, 616 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (declining to consider the sufficiency of the evidence presented at a hearing that resulted in the entry of an unappealed order for a temporary injunction on an appeal from a subsequent order denying a motion to dissolve or modify the temporary injunction); Buchman v. Canard, 926 So.2d 390, 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (noting that the doctrine of law of the case applies to a per curiam decision of the appellate court); Calicchio v. Calicchio, 693 So.2d 1124, 1124 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (noting that the appellant could not use the appeal of a contempt order as a vehicle to challenge the unappealed order which the contempt order sought to enforce). Accordingly, we affirm the circuit court’s order in all other respects.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
WHATLEY, WALLACE, and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kennan G. Dandar & Dandar & Dandar, P.A. v. Church of Scientology Flag Serv. Org., Inc., 190 So. 3d 1100 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)…ction* because the case had been dismissed with prejudice.- This court reversed the order on appeal “to the extent that it awarded $50,000 in damages against Dandar and in favor of the Church.” Dandar v. Church of Scientology Flag Serv. Org., Inc., 59 So. 3d 144, 145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). The opinion of this court does not expressly pass upon the jurisdictional claim. However, following its holding, the opinion continued by stating: “Dandar’s remaining arguments are either procedurally barred or are otherwise…
-
Est. OF Kyle Thomas Brennan v. Church OF Scientology Flag Serv. Org., Inc., 645 F.3d 1267 (11th Cir. 2011)…Court of Appeals “reverse[d] the circuit court’s order to the extent that it awarded $50,000 in damages against Dandar and in favor of [Scientology],” but “affirm[ed] the circuit court’s order in all other respects.” Dandar v. Church of Scientology, 59 So. 3d 144 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2011). On May 20, 2011, Dandar filed a Petition for Writ of Prohibition with the Florida Supreme Court seeking an order “directing the Second District to issue an order recognizing that the circuit court was without jurisdiction to…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Dep't OF Transp. v. Juliano, 801 So. 2d 101 (Fla. 2001)
- Hunter v. Dennies Contracting Co., Inc., 693 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
- Specialty Rests. Corp. v. Elliott, 924 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- M.C.G. v. Hillsborough Cnty. Sch. Bd., 927 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
- Calicchio v. Calicchio, 693 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Buchman v. Canard, 926 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)