INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS, LOCAL UNION 390, PETITIONERS,
v.
MIAMI RETAIL GROCERS, INC., RESPONDENT
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 Florida Supreme Court addresses whether a lower court properly issued an injunction in a labor dispute without requiring the plaintiff to post a bond as required by statute. The Court holds that while the injunction was properly issued, the lower court erred in failing to require a bond absent a showing that the plaintiff could not afford one.
The lower court did not err in entering the injunction because the record failed to establish that the election was conducted in accordance with statutory requirements. However, the lower court erred in failing to require a bond absent a showing that the plaintiff was unable to provide one. The court must either dissolve the injunction or require the posting of a bond sufficient to indemnify the petitioner.
“the record accompanying the petition for certiorari fails to establish that the election was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the statute. Therefore, the lower court was not in error in entering the injunction”
The Court upholds the substantive entry of the injunction based on the record regarding statutory election requirements.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe lower court entered an injunction in a case involving the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local Union 390, and Miami Retail Grocers, Inc. …
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 Election Procedures cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Two propositions are presented in the petition for writ of certiorari in this case. The first is that the lower court erred in the entry of the injunction and the second is that the court erred in its failure to require from the plaintiff below a bond in accordance with the provisions of Section 64.03, F.S.A. As to the propriety of the entry of the original injunction and the continuance of the same in force after the taking of testimony, the record accompanying the petition for certiorari fails to establish that the election was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the statute. Therefore, the lower court was not in error in entering the injunction and continuing it in force after the hearing on the motion to dismiss. On the other hand, there is no showing in this record that the plaintiff in the court below was unable to give an appropriate bond. In the absence of such showing, the court below should not have entered the injunction or continued the same in force after the taking of testimony on the motion to dissolve.
Certiorari should issue and the chancellor is hereby directed to dissolve the injunction or require the posting of an injunction bond in an amount sufficient to indemnify petitioner for such costs and damages as it might incur or suffer in the event it ultimately be determined that it was wrongfully enjoined or restrained by said temporary injunction. Lewis v. Lewis, Fla., 66 So. 2d 260.
TERRELL, Acting Chief Justice, and MATHEWS, DREW and BUFORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Belk's Dep't Store v. Scherman, 117 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)…d conditioned as required by law. Sections 64.02, 64.03, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.; Dixie Music Co. v. Pike, 135 Fla. 671, 185 So. 441; Lewis v. Lewis, Fla.1953, 66 So. 2d 260; International Brotherhood of Teamsters, etc., v. Miami Retail Grocers, Fla.1954, 76 So. 2d 491. See 17 Fla.Jur., Injunctions, §§ 70, 71. A bond similar in form and conditions may be, and ordinarily is required of a plaintiff who obtains ex parte or for purposes such as those of the instant case, the appointment of a receiver. See Dixie Music…
-
Minimatic Components, Inc. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 494 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)…requirement of nominal bond in the absence of extenuating circumstances emasculates the salutary purpose of the rule; therefore, the posting of a bond is mandatory in most instances. See Int’l Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Miami Retail Grocers, Inc., 76 So. 2d 491 (Fla.1954); Byrne v. Rec Centers, Inc., 309 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). Accordingly, we hold that bond in this case was grossly inadequate. For the foregoing reasons we reverse and remand with the direction that the injunction be vacated. REVE…
-
Herschel Levy v. Gourmet Masters, Inc., 214 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…(a) of Rule 1.-610, supra. Furthermore, neither Gourmet Masters nor Dale Foods were ordered to post a bond as contemplated in subsections (b) and (e) of Rule 1.610, supra. See: International Brotherhood, etc. v. Miami Retail Grocers, Inc., Fla.1954, 76 So. 2d 491; Lewis v. Lewis, Fla.1953, 66 So. 2d 260; Dixie Music Co. v. Pike, 135 Fla. 671, 185 So. 441 (1938) ; Metropolitan Dade County, v. Polk Pools, Inc., Fla.App.1960, 124 So. 2d 737. Nor did Rosa Levy have notice or an opportunity to be heard. While thi…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lewis v. Lewis, 66 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1953)