Leopold v. Richard Bertram & Co.
265 So. 2d 710
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 29, 1972·No. No. 72-758·Published·Cited by 6 cases
Opinion
By this interlocutory appeal we are called upon to review the propriety of a temporary injunction. Without passing on the merits, we reverse the order granting the temporary injunction because same failed to provide for the posting of a bond. Metropolitan Dade County v. Polk Pools, Inc., Fla.App.1960, 124 So.2d 737; Hoffman v. White, Fla.App.1970, 235 So.2d 43; Berry v. Morgan Adhesives Co., Fla.App.1972, 262 So.2d 691; Rule 1.610(b), R.C.P., 31 F.S.A.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Leopold v. Richard Bertram & Co., 265 So. 2d 710 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).
265 So. 2d 710 (Leopold v. Richard Bertram & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Layne & Brill, P.A. v. Brill
453 So. 2d 890 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Tri-Plaza Corp. v. Field
382 So. 2d 330 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Sunrise Point, Inc. v. Foss
373 So. 2d 438 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1979)
Muss v. Rosenberg
353 So. 2d 203 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)
Crow, Pope & Carter, Inc. v. James
349 So. 2d 827 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)
City Nat. Bank v. SOMERSET DEVELOP.
330 So. 2d 501 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)