Buccina v. Mid Am Recovery Services, Inc.

732 So. 2d 439, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5644, 1999 WL 270317
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 5, 1999
DocketNo. 98-04186
StatusPublished

This text of 732 So. 2d 439 (Buccina v. Mid Am Recovery Services, Inc.) 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
Buccina v. Mid Am Recovery Services, Inc., 732 So. 2d 439, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5644, 1999 WL 270317 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the temporary injunction forbidding him from soliciting ap-pellee’s customers or employees. Appellant’s employment contract with appellee, a consumer debt collection service, contained a noncompete agreement that, ap-pellee claims, appellant had breached. We have found no error regarding entry of the injunction, but remand for factual findings and for an evidentiary hearing on the proper amount of bond. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.610; Richard v. Behavioral Healthcare Options, Inc., 647 So.2d 976 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.

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

Related

Richard v. BEHAV. HEALTHCARE OPTIONS
647 So. 2d 976 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
732 So. 2d 439, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5644, 1999 WL 270317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/buccina-v-mid-am-recovery-services-inc-fladistctapp-1999.