CAM CORPORATION OF BROWARD FORMERLY KNOWN AS CAM CORPORATION OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
MELVIN T. GOLDBERGER, INDIVIDUALLY, ETC., RESPONDENTS
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.
Petitioner sought specific performance of a real estate sale contract and filed a notice of lis pendens. The trial court ordered petitioner to post a bond as a condition of maintaining the lis pendens. Petitioner challenges this order by certiorari, arguing the court erred in requiring bond when petitioner demonstrated inability to post it.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in requiring a bond. The fixing of the amount of a bond in connection with a lis pendens based on a contract is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court, and the court may require a bond even when the party claims inability to post it.
[1] A lis pendens may not be asserted against real property when the underlying complaint seeks only money damages and not a direct claim against the property itself.
[2] A lis pendens may be permitted to remain in effect against specific property only upon the posting of an appropriate bond by the plaintiff.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Under these circumstances Section 48.23 Florida Statutes allows the court to deal with a notice of lis pendens as it may deal with injunctions.”
Establishes that lis pendens based on a contract are governed by injunction rules regarding bonds.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner brought suit against respondent for specific performance of a written contract for the sale of real estate. Petitioner filed a notice of li…
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 Discretionary Matter cases and more on FLexlaw
BERANEK, Judge.
Petitioner brought suit against respondent seeking specific performance of a contract for the sale of real estate. Petitioner then filed a notice of lis pendens against the real estate and respondent moved to dissolve the lis pendens or require a bond. The trial court ordered a bond posted and petitioner here seeks review of that order by certiorari. The action for specific performance was based upon a written contract and not upon a duly recorded instrument or mechanic’s lien. Under these circumstances Section 48.23 Florida Statutes allows the court to deal with a notice of lis pendens as it may deal with injunctions.
Rule 1.610(c) Fla.R.Civ.P. governing injunctions requires posting of a bond before a temporary injunction is issued except that the court may issue an injunction without bond if after hearing it appears the party is unable to post bond. A hearing was held in this matter at which a witness for petitioner testified bond could not be posted. Petitioner would have us hold the trial court erred in requiring bond under such circumstances. This we decline to do. As stated in Metropolitan Dade County v. Parkway Towers Condominium Association, 281 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973), the fixing of the amount of an injunction bond is a discretionary matter. Clearly the requirement of a bond in an injunction proceeding is within the sound discretion of the trial court. This same rationale extends to the case presented here involving a lis pendens based on a contract. Petitioner has failed to demonstrate any abuse of discretion herein and there has been no departure from the essential requirements of law.
Certiorari is hereby DENIED.
DOWNEY, C. J., and LETTS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Parkway Towers Condo. Ass'n, 281 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)