DIVINE DESIGNS SALON, INC. A/K/A DIVINE DESIGNS SALON & SPA
v.
ARDEN THOMPSON
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.
This case involved a dispute over a restrictive covenant and trade secrets. The appellate court affirmed most of the lower court's decision but reversed and remanded for a recalculation of damages due to a factual error regarding the timing of an injunction.
The court held that the circuit court made a factual error in calculating damages by using the wrong date for the temporary injunction. The court affirmed the rejection of the trade secrets claim and the denial of permanent injunctive relief.
[1] When a trial court calculates damages for breach of contract based on an erroneous factual premise regarding the date of a material event, the appellate court must revers…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“We affirm the final judgment in all respects and without further comment except as to one point.”
Indicates the court's general agreement with the lower court's decision, with a specific exception.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDivine Designs Salon sued Arden Thompson for breaching a restrictive covenant and misappropriating trade secrets. After a bench trial, the circuit cou…
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 Permanent Injunctive Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Darren D. Farfante, Judge. Brent A. Gordon, of The Gordon Law Firm P.A., Tampa; and Robin Trupp, of Curry Law Group, P.A., Brandon, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Richard A. Harrison of Richard A. Harrison, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant. ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, Judge. Divine Designs Salon, Inc., sued Arden Thompson for breach of a restrictive covenant and misappropriation of trade secrets. After a bench trial, the circuit court found in favor of Divine Designs on the breach claim only, and it awarded Divine Designs $4,553.89.1 The judgment award of $4,553.89 was calculated in part on the assumption that only six months had elapsed between Thompson's first breach of the restrictive covenant (April 18, 2018) and the circuit court's entry of the temporary injunction. But the circuit court was mistaken about when it had entered the temporary injunction: although the court vaguely refers to "mid-November 2018," the undisputed record shows that the injunction was not entered until February 28, 2019. We therefore reverse for the circuit court to correct this error, to recalculate damages using the formula set forth on pages 9– 10 of the court's May 22, 2020, posttrial order, and to enter an amended judgment so reflecting. Cf. Pahokee Hous. Auth., Inc. v.
S. Fla. Sanitation Co., 478 So. 2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) (reversing and remanding for recalculation of damages).
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded with instructions. LaROSE and SMITH, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pahokee Hous. Auth., Inc. v. S. Fla. Sanitation Co., 478 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)