BITUMINOUS CASUALTY CORPORATION, AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION, ET AL.,
v.
CARRIE NELSON WILLIAMS, ET AL.
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.
The Florida Supreme Court denied certiorari, affirming interlocutory orders that denied a motion to dismiss a bill of complaint and a motion to dissolve an injunction granted without notice or bond. The court found the bill of complaint had equity and the injunction was necessary to preserve complainant's rights.
The Florida Supreme Court held that the bill of complaint possessed equity and that the injunction was reasonably necessary to preserve the complainant's rights, justifying its issuance without notice. The court also found no reversible error in granting the injunction without bond due to the circumstances.
“We, after consideration of the record in the light of briefs and oral argument, reach conclusion that the bill of complaint is not entirely without equity.”
Establishes the court's finding that the initial complaint had legal merit.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe petitioners sought certiorari to review two interlocutory orders from the lower court: one denying a motion to dismiss the bill of complaint, and …
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 Temporary Injunction Without Notice cases and more on FLexlaw
This case is before us on petition for certiorari to review interlocutory orders under rule 34.
The orders complained of are, (1) order denying motion to dismiss bill of complaint; and (2) order denying motion to dissolve injunction, which injunction was granted without notice and without bond.
We, after consideration of the record in the light of briefs and oral argument, reach conclusion that the bill of complaint is not entirely without equity. We also reach the conclusion that to preserve the rights of the complainant, it reasonably appeared necessary to the chancellor to grant the injunction without notice and that, because of the circumstances as shown by the record, there was no reversible error in granting the injunction without bond.
It, therefore, follows that certiorari must be, and is, denied.
So ordered.
BROWN, C. J., WHITFIELD, BUFORD, and ADAMS, JJ., concur.