From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ramos v. Stabinski & Funt, P.A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 23, 1986
494 So. 2d 298 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

Opinion

No. 86-1208.

September 23, 1986.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Murray Goldman, J.

Minervino Rodriguez, Jr., Miami, for appellant.

Robey Pelstring and R. James Pelstring, Miami, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.


The non-final order appealed ordering defendant Anthony E. Ramos to place $20,000 in a trust or interest-bearing account pending further order of the trial court is reversed upon a holding that a disputed and contingent claim for money damages does not constitute, by itself, a sufficient basis for injunctive relief. Ciabotti v. Milo, 432 So.2d 792 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Digaeteno v. Perotti, 374 So.2d 1015 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Oxford International Bank and Trust, Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith, Inc., 374 So.2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. dismissed, 383 So.2d 1199 (Fla. 1980).

Plaintiff/appellee Stabinski Funt, P.A.'s contention that the order entered was a contempt order relative to the defendant's violation of a preliminary injunction entered in a prior case is without merit as the trial court expressly denied plaintiff's motion for contempt.

Reversed.


Summaries of

Ramos v. Stabinski & Funt, P.A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 23, 1986
494 So. 2d 298 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)
Case details for

Ramos v. Stabinski & Funt, P.A.

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY E. RAMOS, APPELLANT, v. STABINSKI FUNT, P.A., APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Sep 23, 1986

Citations

494 So. 2d 298 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

Citing Cases

Rosasco v. Rosasco

Furthermore, the Wife did not demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief requested. A disputed and…

Pianeta v. Lieberman

Pursuant to Rule 9.130(a)(3)(B) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, we review this order as one…