KEDAC, INC. AND ERIC W. DECKINGER, APPELLANTS,
v.
EXPORT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, CAN-FLO INTERNATIONAL D/B/A LANTANA PEAT & SOIL, G.C. HAULING, INC., EUGENE CARUSO, ANNA CARUSO, LAC ENTERPRISES, INC., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Injunctive Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court summarily denied appellants’ motion for temporary injunction to prevent the sale of stock pledged to secure a debt. The decision was based solely on the trial court’s review of the motion; no hearing was held. The reason given for denial was that the injury alleged in the motion could be remedied by an award of damages.
Injunctive relief will not be granted routinely to prevent t e wrongful sale of stock because a value can usually be placed on the shares after they are sold. Morris v. Ricks, 573 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). However, the appellants should not have been deprived of the opportunity to offer evidence that in their case a monetary award would be inadequate. The order denying the temporary injunction is reversed, and the case remanded for a hearing on the appellants’ motion.
DELL, POLEN and WARNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Deckinger v. Exp. Dev. Corp., 701 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…rt denying appellant’s motion to temporarily enjoin the sale of stock pledged to secure a debt. The order was entered after an evidentiary hearing, conducted pursuant to our remand requiring such a hearing in Kedac, Inc. v. Export Development Corp., 685 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (Deckinger I). We agree with Judge Warner’s dissent that the trial court incorrectly relied on ap-pellees’ argument of collateral estoppel based [*671] on the bankruptcy proceedings. However, we believe the record supports the…
-
USA Prescription, Inc. v. Celestial Grp., Inc., 817 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…at a hearing for which notice was given for an entirely different motion filed by the appellant. The appellant should not have been deprived of the opportunity to offer evidence at a properly noticed hearing. See Kedac, Inc. v. Export Dev. Corp., 685 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Accordingly, the trial court’s order denying the temporary injunction is reversed, and the case remanded for a properly noticed hearing on the appellant’s motion for temporary injunction. STONE, WARNER, JJ„ and OWEN, WILLIAM C…
Authorities Cited
- Morris v. Ricks, 573 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)