Belhomme v. Bertrand
774 So. 2d 760, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 15193, 2000 WL 1728265
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 22, 2000·No. No. 3D00-2153·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Because the plaintiff met her burden of showing the essential elements necessary for the issuance of a temporary injunction, namely, “a clear legal right or interest in the subject matter of the suit, the likelihood of irreparable harm because of the unavailability of an adequate remedy at law, and a substantial likelihood of success of the merits,” Oxford Int’l Bank & Trust, Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 374 So.2d 54, 56 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), we affirm the trial court’s order.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Belhomme v. Bertrand, 774 So. 2d 760, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 15193, 2000 WL 1728265 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).
774 So. 2d 760 (Belhomme v. Bertrand) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Johnson v. LaSalle
774 So. 2d 760 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)