From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tom v. Russ

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Mar 9, 2000
752 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Summary

remanding temporary injunction because the trial court failed to address the likelihood of success on the merits or considerations of public interest

Summary of this case from Edwards v. Harris

Opinion

No. 1D99-2789.

Opinion filed March 9, 2000.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County, Judge Paul S. Bryan.

William E. Whitley, P.A., High Springs, for Appellant.

Teresa Byrd Morgan of Teresa Byrd Morgan, P.A., Lake City, for Appellee.


Appellant seeks reversal of a temporary injunction. We remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

As this Court has previously recognized, even after hearing and notice, a temporary injunction is properly entered only in certain well-defined circumstances. The issuance of a preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy which must be based upon a showing of the following criteria: (1) the likelihood of irreparable harm; (2) the unavailability of an adequate remedy at law; (3) substantial likelihood of success on the merits; and (4) considerations of public interest. Spradley v. Old Harmony Baptist Church, 721 So.2d 735, 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610 requires a court's injunctive order to "specify the reasons for entry" of the injunction, "and this court has emphasized that `[c]lear, definite, and unequivocally sufficient factual findings must support each of the four conclusions necessary to justify entry of a preliminary injunction.'" Spradley, 721 So.2d at 737, quoting City of Jacksonville v. Naegele Outdoor Adver. Co., 634 So.2d 750, 754 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), approved by, 659 So.2d 1046 (Fla. 1995). Additionally, Rule 1.610(b) requires that no temporary injunction shall be entered unless a bond is given by the movant in an amount the court deems proper, except in limited circumstances not applicable in this case.

The order on appeal fails to address likelihood of success on the merits or considerations of public interest. The order also fails to require a bond. Accordingly, we remand with instructions to the trial court to either enter an order that satisfies all requirements for entry of a temporary injunction or if appropriate, an order denying the injunction.

Reversed and remanded.

BARFIELD, C.J., LAWRENCE and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.


Summaries of

Tom v. Russ

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Mar 9, 2000
752 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

remanding temporary injunction because the trial court failed to address the likelihood of success on the merits or considerations of public interest

Summary of this case from Edwards v. Harris
Case details for

Tom v. Russ

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE C. TOM, Appellant, v. JESSIE B. RUSS, as Personal Representative of…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Mar 9, 2000

Citations

752 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Weltman v. Riggs

Although we are sympathetic to the court's effort to both prevent potential irreparable harm and afford a…

Weltman v. Riggs

Although we are sympathetic to the court's effort to both prevent potential irreparable harm and afford a…