Acosta v. Acosta

561 So. 2d 17, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3219, 1990 WL 60901
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 9, 1990
DocketNo. 89-01396
StatusPublished

This text of 561 So. 2d 17 (Acosta v. Acosta) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Acosta v. Acosta, 561 So. 2d 17, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3219, 1990 WL 60901 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the temporary mandatory injunction entered in this case. No showing was made of an inadequate remedy at law. See Wilson v. Sandstrom, 317 So.2d 732 (Fla.1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1053, 96 S.Ct. 782, 46 L.Ed.2d 642 (1976); Hiles v. [18]*18Auto Bahn Federation, Inc., 498 So.2d 997 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986).

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Wilson v. Sandstrom
317 So. 2d 732 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1975)
Hiles v. Auto Bahn Federation, Inc.
498 So. 2d 997 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
561 So. 2d 17, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3219, 1990 WL 60901, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/acosta-v-acosta-fladistctapp-1990.