CITY NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, A NATIONAL BANKING ASSOCIATION, APPELLANT,
v.
SOMERSET DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF AMERICA, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ET AL., 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.
The court held that the interlocutory order enjoining the sale of a note was improper because it violated procedural rules for injunctions.
Plaintiff sought to sell a $2,000,000 note in a mortgage foreclosure suit. The trial court issued an order enjoining and restraining the plaintiff fro…
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 Verified Pleading cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff brings this interlocutory appeal from an order in a mortgage foreclosure suit which enjoined and restrained plaintiff:
“from conducting any sale, public or private, of the $2,000,000.00 note as described in the defendant’s motion and specifically restrained and enjoined from conducting the sale which it proposed to hold on December 10, 1975, at 10:30 o’clock a. m., .
“This restraining order and order enjoining the sale of said $2,000,000.00 note, shall continue in full force and effect until further Order of this Court.”
We reverse on account of the following:
1. The order violated F.R.C.P. 1.610(b), in that:
A. It was entered without a verified pleading, affidavits, or sworn testimony. Tampa Port Authority v. Deen, 179 So. 2d 416 (Fla.App. 2nd 1965).
B. No bond was required and there was no showing that defendant was unable to give bond, Leopold v. Richard Bertram & Co., 265 So. 2d 710 (Fla.App. 3rd 1972); Carmel v. Lumidor Industries, Inc., 262 So. 2d 911 (Fla.App. 3rd 1972).
2. There was no showing that defendant would suffer irreparable injury or that money damages would not be a sufficient remedy, First National Bank in St. Petersburg v. Ferris, 156 So. 2d 421 (Fla.App. 2nd 1963); Fla.Stat. 679.-507(1) (1975).
3. Plaintiff was deprived of its rights under Fla.Stat. 679.504 without good or legal cause.
REVERSED.
WALDEN, C. J., and CROSS and DOWNEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Tampa Port Auth. v. Deen, 179 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)
- Polakow v. Bone & Schultz Corp., 156 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- The First Nat'l Bank IN ST. Petersburg v. Ferris, 156 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Leopold v. Richard Bertram & Co., 265 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- McCOY v. Florida-Georgia Tractor Co., Inc., 265 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- Carmel v. Lumidor Indus., Inc., 262 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)