CITY GAS COMPANY OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
RO-MONT SOUTH GREEN CONDOMINIUM "R", INC., ETC., ET AL., 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 court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to dissolve the injunction.
An injunction required appellees to deposit money for appellant's gas services to a condominium. Appellant, a party-defendant, sought to dissolve the …
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 Motion To Dissolve Injunction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
By this appeal, the appellant seeks review of an order denying a motion to dissolve an injunction. The injunction required the appellees to deposit money periodically in the registry of the court and the clerk to turn the monies over to the appellant for gas services, when it was required to resume serving a 644-unit condominium.
At the time the order under review was entered, the appellant had been made a party-defendant by court order; had been served with process and a complaint. The principal grounds urged for reversal are alleged defects in the procedures utilized by the chancellor at the time of the entry of the temporary injunction.
We determine this appeal not on the record as was before the chancellor at the time of the entry of the temporary injunction, but as the record was at the time the motion to dissolve came on for hearing. In this connection, see: Belk’s Department Store, Miami, Inc. v. Scherman, 117 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); DeCarlucci v. Granulite, Incorporated, 171 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965).
From an examination of all the pleadings and the statements of respective counsel, we cannot say that the trial court abused any discretion in denying the motion to dissolve and, therefore, the order under review be and the same is hereby affirmed. This, of course, is without prejudice to the appellant seeking appropriate relief in the trial court as to the adequacy of the amount to be posted periodically in the registry of the court by the appellees, and' to seek such other relief as may be necessary to require compliance with the temporary injunction.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Zuckerman v. Prof'l Writers OF Fla., Inc., 398 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
-
McMURRAIN v. Fason, 573 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…me the motion to dissolve came for hearing, not on the record before the trial court at the time it issued the writ. As authority for this principle, the fourth district cited City Gas Company of Florida v. Ro-Mont South Green Condominium “R," Inc., 350 So. 2d 790 (Fla.3d DCA 1977), a case in which a temporary injunction was entered requiring the defendant to deposit money in the court registry to be turned over to the plaintiff gas company for gas services. The third district held that review of an order den…
-
Gray v. Gray, 958 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…temporary injunction without notice, in which the appellants contend deficiencies existed, and which is the subject of their appeal, was thus modified and superseded pro tanto. See generally City Gas Co. of Fla. v. Ro-Mont S. Green Condo. “R”, Inc., 350 So. 2d 790, 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). III. A temporary injunction may be entered without notice to an opposing party when “it appears from the specific facts shown by affidavit or verified pleading that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will re…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Belk's Dep't Store v. Scherman, 117 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)
- Alonso v. Court Paper Co., Inc., 171 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- de Carlucci v. Granulite, 171 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)