Damages For Wrongful Injunction

43 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Parker Tampa TWO, Inc. v. Somerset Dev. Corp.
  544 So. 2d 1018· Fla.· 1989-06-01 ·cited 97×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that damages recoverable for wrongfully obtaining an injunction are limited to the amount of the injunction bond when the injunction is obtained in good faith. The Court adopted the majority view followed by most states and federal courts, rejecting
• Shea v. Cent. Diagnostic Servs., Inc.
  552 So. 2d 344· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-11-22 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the trial court erred in ordering the return of the injunction bond, as the defendants are entitled to seek damages for wrongful issuance.
• Seaescape, Ltd., Inc. v. Maximum Mktg. Exposure, Inc.
  568 So. 2d 952· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-09-21 ·cited 31×
  SeaEscape appealed a trial court's ex parte temporary injunction requiring it to continue employment contracts with Panebianco and Maximum Marketing. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that personal service contracts are not enforceable by injunction and that Se
• Provident Mgmt. Corp. v. City OF Treasure Island
  718 So. 2d 738· Fla.· 1998-05-07 ·cited 27×
  This case concerns whether a real estate management firm, Provident Management Corporation, is entitled to damages for business loss resulting from a city's enforcement of a land use ordinance, with the dissent arguing against such entitlement based on sovereign immunity.
• Provident Mgmt. Corp. v. City OF Treasure Island
  796 So. 2d 481· Fla.· 2001-05-24 ·cited 26×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that sovereign immunity limitations under section 768.28 do not apply to damages awards resulting from wrongfully issued preliminary injunctions obtained by governmental entities. When a court dispenses with the bond requirement for a governmental e
• Cushman & Wakefield, Inc. v. Cletus Cozart and Patricia Cozart
  561 So. 2d 368· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-05-04 ·cited 25×
  The court reversed a trial court's denial of a motion to increase an injunction bond from $10, holding that such a nominal bond is tantamount to no bond and that trial courts must consider anticipated costs and damages when setting or modifying bond amounts, though they may also
• NET First Nat'l Bank v. First Telebanc Corp.
  834 So. 2d 944· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-01-22 ·cited 23×
  Net First National Bank executives and shareholders appeal a temporary injunction that prevented them from acting as directors of the Bank and its holding company. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the lower court abused its discretion by granting the inj
• Advantage Digit. Sys., Inc. v. Digit. Imaging Servs., Inc.
  870 So. 2d 111· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-12-03 ·cited 20×
  Digital Imaging Services sought a temporary injunction against former employees Knaus, Geenen, and Foust, and their new employer Advantage Digital, based on claims of trade secret theft, tortious interference, and breach of noncompetition agreements. The appellate court reversed
• Whitby v. Infinity Radio Inc.
  951 So. 2d 890· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-01-24 ·cited 19×
  Elena Whitby, a radio personality who worked for WEAT-FM, breached her non-compete covenant by moving to competitor WRMF-FM. The trial court granted summary judgment on enforceability of the non-compete, directed a verdict against Whitby's counterclaim for wrongful injunction, an
• Benz v. Compania Naviera Hidalgo, S.A.
  205 F.2d 944· 9th Cir.· 1953-06-30 ·cited 19×
  In the absence of a posted bond or security, damages cannot be recovered for the wrongful issuance of a temporary injunction, even if granted without just cause.
• Page Commc'ns Eng'rs, Inc. v. Fkoehlke
  475 F.2d 994· D.C. Cir.· 1973-03-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that Rule 65(c) does not mandate automatic assessment of damages on an injunction bond, and the district court has discretion to refuse damages in the interest of equity and justice.
• Pondella Hall FOR Hire, Inc. v. Lawson Lamar
  866 So. 2d 719· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-01-02 ·cited 17×
  Pondella Hall for Hire appeals dismissal of its counterclaims for damages arising from a civil forfeiture action. The court affirms dismissal of wrongful injunction and forfeiture damage claims but reverses dismissal of takings claims regarding personal property, remanding for de
• Monroe Division v. DE Bari
  562 F.2d 30· 10th Cir.· 1977-09-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a party seeking damages for a wrongful preliminary injunction is entitled to a hearing, even if security was not posted, and that the plaintiff's financial strength does not negate liability.
• S & T Builders v. Globe Props., Inc.
  909 So. 2d 375· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-08-03 ·cited 12×
  The appellate court reviewed a trial court's order setting a bond amount for a lis pendens without an evidentiary hearing. The court held that an evidentiary hearing is required before setting such a bond and clarified that attorney's fees can be considered damages for wrongful f
• Blumenthal v. Merrill Lynch
  910 F.2d 1049· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-08 ·cited 12×
  A district court has jurisdiction to issue a preliminary injunction pending arbitration, and if arbitrators later dissolve the injunction, it may be deemed 'wrongful,' allowing recovery on the injunction bond.
• Leibowitz v. The City OF Miami Beach
  683 So. 2d 204· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-11-27 ·cited 10×
  The Leibowitzes obtained a temporary injunction against Miami Beach, but the city dissolved it and sought attorney's fees. The court upheld the award of fees exceeding the bond amount but reversed because the trial court improperly based the hourly rate on the city attorney's sal
• City OF Treasure Island v. Provident Mgmt. Corp. & Laurence N. Belair
  678 So. 2d 1322· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-06-28 ·cited 10×
  The City of Treasure Island appealed judgments awarding damages to Provident Management Corporation and Laurence Belair for a zoning injunction that was later reversed. The court held that a municipality does not automatically become its own surety when a trial court dispenses wi
• Crow v. James
  349 So. 2d 827· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-09-13 ·cited 9×
  The Florida Third District Court of Appeal reversed a temporary injunction granted without a bond requirement, holding that trial courts must either require a bond or take evidence and make a finding that the party seeking the injunction is unable to post bond before granting suc
• Cermesoni v. Maneiro
  144 So. 3d 627· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-08-06 ·cited 8×
  In a family law matter where an Argentine court issued a freeze order on Miami bank accounts via letters rogatory, the Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion to increase the injunction bond, holding that Florida's ancillary role in enf
• Knight v. Global Contact Lens, Inc.
  319 So. 2d 622· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-09-09 ·cited 8×
  In this landlord-tenant dispute, the Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed that the landlord Karl Knight was entitled to possession of his property and that a temporary injunction wrongfully obtained by the tenant Global Contact Lens was improper. The court reversed the trial
• Orleans Parish Sch. Bd. v. Bush
  252 F.2d 253· 5th Cir.· 1958-02-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the failure to file a required injunction bond before the injunction's affirmance was a curable irregularity, not a defect that rendered the injunction void.
• Nat'l Popsicle Corp. v. Icyclair, Inc.
  119 F.2d 799· 9th Cir.· 1941-05-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred by adopting a master's report without making its own special findings of fact as required by Rule 52(a).
• Vital Pharms., Inc. v. Prof'l Supplements, LLC
  210 So. 3d 766· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-02-15 ·cited 7×
  Vital Pharmaceuticals appealed an award of attorneys' fees to former employees who were wrongfully enjoined from working for a competitor. The court reversed, holding that because the trial court failed to require a bond when issuing the temporary injunction, damages including at
• Daiwa Prods., Inc. v. Nationsbank, N.A.
  885 So. 2d 884· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-09-01 ·cited 6×
  Daiwa Products sought to enjoin payment on a letter of credit after discovering the beneficiary (SAAT) fraudulently misrepresented that goods had been shipped. The trial court found United Mizrahi Bank, which financed SAAT's operations and presented the draft for payment, was a h
• Reginald and Otelia Grant v. Smith
  574 F.2d 252· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court's emphasis on the plaintiffs' lack of good faith may have improperly influenced its determination of discrimination claims under certain provisions of the Fair Housing Act and remanded for further findings. The court also held that the standard
• Carpenters Dist. Council OF Jacksonville & Vicinity v. The Honorable Roger J. Waybright
  282 So. 2d 193· Fla. 1st DCA· 1973-09-13 ·cited 6×
  The court amended its prior order on mandate to grant a writ of prohibition, restraining the lower court from further jurisdiction except to dissolve the injunction and consider damages.
• Silvers v. TTC Indus., Inc.
  484 F.2d 194· 6th Cir.· 1973-09-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to rescission of the reorganization plan due to their knowledge of the misrepresented facts and lack of diligence, but remanded for further determination of damages related to the wrongful injunction.
• DG BF, LLC v. Ray
  2020 WL 3867123· Del. Ch.· 2022-06-27 ·cited 5×
  The Court of Chancery denied the defendants' motion to recover damages resulting from an improperly issued injunction, holding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to award such damages when no bond was posted to secure the injunction, due to a contractual waiver by the par
• Bradenton Grp., Inc. v. State
  970 So. 2d 403· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-11-09 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed a civil RICO forfeiture judgment against bingo operators, holding that violations of Florida's Bingo Statute cannot form the basis for RICO liability and that collateral estoppel barred the relitigation of issues already decided
• City OF Treasure Island v. Provident Mgmt. Corp. & Laurence N. Belair
  738 So. 2d 357· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-06-11 ·cited 4×
  On remand from the Florida Supreme Court, the Second District Court of Appeal addressed whether a municipality has liability for wrongful injunction and whether sovereign immunity applies. The court held that wrongful injunction is a tort claim subject to the statutory liability
• City Nat'l Bank OF Miami under Land Tr. No. 5008303 v. Centrust Sav. Bank
  530 So. 2d 317· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-04-26 ·cited 4×
• Hoon v. Harmer Steel Prods. & Supply Co.
  278 F.2d 427· 9th Cir.· 1960-03-24 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgments, finding that the appellant's claims were unsupported by evidence and that the trial court's factual findings were not clearly erroneous.
• Andrist v. Spleen
  142 So. 3d 950· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-07-16 ·cited 3×
  In this defamation case, appellants (stand-up comedians) appealed an order limiting their damages from a wrongfully issued ex parte temporary injunction to the $100 bond amount. The court held that where an injunction is obtained ex parte without notice and the enjoined party pro
• Goslin v. Glenfed Brokerage Servs.
  683 So. 2d 620· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-11-22 ·cited 2×
  Goslin and PaineWebber appealed a trial court order confirming an arbitration award and denying damages for a wrongfully issued injunction. The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that the trial court erred by pre-emptively denying damages for wrongful injunction witho
• Parker Tampa TWO, Inc. v. Somerset Dev. Corp.
  522 So. 2d 502· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-03-18 ·cited 2×
  Parker Tampa Two appealed a final judgment limiting its damages recovery from Somerset Development Corporation to the amount of Somerset's injunction bond ($10,000) for wrongfully obtaining a temporary injunction. The court affirmed, holding that under Florida law, damages for wr
• In re Dickie Joe Ladner v. Dickie Joe Ladner
  799 F.2d 1023· 5th Cir.· 1986-09-15 ·cited 2×
  A party cannot recover damages for a wrongfully issued injunction unless a bond or security was posted by the party seeking the injunction, even if damages were sustained.
• Shima v. Shima
  D.D.C.· 1943-12-27 ·cited 1×
  A husband should be allowed to set off damages sustained from a wife's wrongful injunction against the attorney fees awarded to the wife's attorney, especially if the attorney participated in the wrongful conduct.
• ShipJoy, LLC v. Sves, LLC
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-05-13
  Damages under § 60.07, Florida Statutes, are unrecoverable when a temporary injunction is dissolved without an injunction bond, unless the bond was dispensed with pursuant to Rule 1.610(b) (applicable only to government entities) or the injunction was obtained maliciously or in b
• ST. Marks Pond Indus., LLC v. Boles
  Fla. 5th DCA· 2023-05-26
  A trial court must impose a bond for a temporary injunction and cannot waive the bond requirement absent evidence of a valid stipulation or other recognized grounds.
• Sweet v. Tucker
  260 So. 3d 1191· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-01-07
  When a trial judge becomes aware of grounds for recusal at or before a hearing but issues a substantive order after that awareness, the order must be vacated and the matter remanded for a new hearing before an impartial judge.
• State v. Bradenton Grp., Inc.
  26 So. 3d 636· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-01-08
  The State of Florida appealed a judgment awarding damages to Bradenton Group, Inc. for a wrongful temporary injunction obtained in 1995 without a bond that shut down the company's bingo hall operations. The court affirmed the judgment, rejecting the State's claims of sovereign an
• Jaffe v. Bank of Am., N.A.
  674 F. Supp. 2d 1360· S.D. Fla.· 2009-12-16
  The court held that Bank of America is entitled to attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses under the Florida UCC and the parties' contract, and that Agricultural Bank of China is entitled to the injunction bond proceeds.
• Golden Gate Mech. Contractors Ass'n v. Seaboard Sur. Co.
  389 F.2d 892· 9th Cir.· 1968-01-30
  The court held that the exoneration of injunction bonds operates prospectively and does not extinguish liability for damages sustained due to the injunction if the plaintiff was not entitled to it. The trial court's findings on liability and damages were supported by competent ev