ED LANE AND ED LANE AUTO SALES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
REUBIN J. CLEIN, JOE CLEIN AND ROBERT WILLIS, 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 Third District Court of Appeal reversed an order allowing defendants to pursue damages for a wrongful injunction in the same suit, holding that without express statutory authorization, such damages must be sought in a separate action on the bond. The court found that Florida Statute § 64.16 did not apply because the plaintiff had requested a jury trial in the original complaint.
Damages for wrongful issuance of a good faith injunction must be pursued in a separate action on the bond, not in the original suit. Section 64.16 does not authorize the procedure sought because the plaintiff requested a jury trial in the original complaint, making the statute inapplicable.
“in the absence of express statutory authority, the only way that a claim for damages can be asserted for the wrongful, but good faith, suing out of an injunction is by way of a separate action at law on the bond”
Establishes the general rule requiring separate action for injunction bond damages absent statutory authority
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiffs sued defendants for defamation and obtained a temporary injunction with a posted bond. The temporary injunction was later dissolved. Defend…
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 Injunction Bond Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiffs sued the defendants in chancery alleging injury to their business and reputation as a result of certain defamatory statements made by the defendants. Plaintiffs sought and later obtained a temporary injunction and a bond was posted. The temporary injunction was subsequently dissolved and, upon motion by the defendants, the chancellor entered an order setting a jury trial date for the determination of damages, if any, suffered by the defendants as a result of the wrongful issuance of the temporary injunction. The plaintiffs took this interlocutory appeal from that order.
The plaintiffs contend that in the absence of express statutory authority, the only way that a claim for damages can be asserted for the wrongful, but good faith, suing out of an injunction is by way of a separate action at law on the bond. The plaintiffs further contend that § 64.16, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.,1 'upon which the defendants relied as authority for the chancellor to conduct a jury trial in the same suit as to the issue of damages under the bond, does not relieve the defendants from the necessity of bringing a separate action at law on the bond for damages, because the plaintiffs had requested a jury trial in their complaint and the defendants had made a similar request as to the issue of damages under the bond, thus making the statute inapplicable in the instant case.
The defendants contend only that § 64.16 authorizes this procedure.
We agree with the plaintiffs’ contentions and accordingly, the order appealed is reversed without prejudice to the defendants to institute a separate action against the plaintiffs on the injunction bond.
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Calder Race Course, Inc. v. Gaitan, 430 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…for appellant’s past refusals to give him stall space. Therefore, appellant is required to institute a separate action at law on the injunction bond before damages may be assessed for the wrongful issuance of the temporary injunction. Lane v. Clein, 151 So. 2d 677 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963). See generally Rader v. Recarey, 352 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Hoffman v. Barlly, 97 So. 2d 355, 356 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957) (referring to section 64.16, Florida Statutes, predecessor to 60.-07). Once a separate action at la…
-
Parker Tampa TWO, Inc. v. Somerset Dev. Corp., 522 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…on. The final judgment resulted from Parker’s claim against Somerset for wrongfully obtaining the injunction. Parker contends that the final judgment should not have been limited to the amount of the bond. We affirm. Somerset, citing Lane v. Clein, 151 So. 2d 677, 678 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963), contends that the amount of damages for wrongfully obtaining an injunction is limited to the amount of the bond when the conduct by which the injunction was obtained was “wrongful, but [in] good faith.” Somerset contends tha…