PHILIP G. MAVON AND OMA JEAN MAVON
v.
CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE AND SCOTT S. LIBERMAN
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 appellate court reversed a temporary injunction that ordered the removal of a boat, finding that the party seeking the injunction failed to present sufficient evidence to support the required legal elements. The case was remanded for an evidentiary hearing.
No, the party seeking the injunction failed to meet their burden of proof. Counsel's arguments, administrative rulings, and photographs alone were insufficient to establish the required elements for a temporary injunction.
[1] A party seeking injunctive relief must establish a factual basis to support each element required for such relief, including irreparable injury, lack of an adequate remed…
[2] The burden of providing competent, substantial evidence to satisfy each element for injunctive relief rests on the party seeking the injunction.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“It is well-settled that the party seeking injunctive relief must establish a factual basis to support the elements of a claim for injunctive relief.”
Establishes the general legal principle regarding the burden of proof for injunctive relief.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellants were ordered by a temporary injunction to remove their boat from a boat lift pending trial. The appellees, seeking the injunction, reli…
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 Clear Legal Right cases and more on FLexlaw
Brent M. Reitman of Liberman Cabrera Thompson & Reitman, PLLC, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee Scott S. Liberman.
PER CURIAM.
Appellants appeal a nonfinal order granting a temporary injunction that directs them to remove their boat from a boat lift pending trial. We reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing.
It is well-settled that the party seeking injunctive relief must establish a factual basis to support the elements of a claim for injunctive relief. Olson v. Olson, 260 So. 3d 367, 369 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). Thus, appellees, appellants’ neighbors, had to present evidence to establish that: (1) irreparable injury will result if the injunction is not granted; (2) there is no adequate remedy at law; (3) the party has a clear legal right to the requested relief; and (4) the public interest will be served by the temporary injunction. Id. at 368–69.
As movants, appellees bore the burden of providing competent, substantial evidence to satisfy each element. SunTrust Banks, Inc. v. Cauthon & McGuigan, PLC, 78 So. 3d 709, 711 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). To support their arguments during the hearings, appellees offered counsel’s
arguments, administrative rulings regarding the boat lift, and photographs, none of which was sufficient evidence to meet that burden. See Olson, 260 So. 3d at 369 (concluding that statements of counsel along with a verified motion with attachments were inadequate to establish the requisite proof); see also Tarantola v. Henghold, 254 So. 3d 1110, 1112 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (concluding that screenshots of a website as proof that the website existed on a certain day to support injunctive relief were insufficient where screenshots were not entered into evidence).
Consequently, we reverse the temporary injunction and remand for the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing and if appellees meet their burden, to enter an order with sufficient factual findings as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610.
Reversed and remanded.
WARNER, GERBER and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Suntrust Banks, Inc. v. Cauthon & McGUIGAN, PLC, 78 So. 3d 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Olson v. Olson, 260 So. 3d 367 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)
- Cristina Tarantola, M.D. v. William B. Henghold, M.D., P.A., 252 So. 3d 155 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)