Nastasi v. Thomas

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nastasi v. Thomas

766 So. 2d 462, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 11326, 2000 WL 1258321

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 6, 2000

DocketNo. 4D00-794

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 766 So. 2d 462 (Nastasi v. Thomas) 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

Nastasi v. Thomas, 766 So. 2d 462, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 11326, 2000 WL 1258321 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court granted appellee’s request for a temporary injunction controlling the use of an easement across appel-lee’s property. Our standard of review is abuse of discretion, South Florida Limousines, Inc. v. Broward County Aviation Dep’t, 512 So.2d 1059 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), and we find no abuse insofar as the easement is concerned. We do agree with the appellant that the trial court erred as a matter of law in enjoining appellant from conveying any portion of his property without offering appellee a right of first refusal. Although the right of first refusal is an issue which was raised by the pleadings, appellee did not seek temporary in-junctive relief in that regard, and the court should not have granted it at this stage of the proceedings. The temporary injunction is therefore affirmed in all respects except for paragraph one which pertains to the right of first refusal.

DELL, KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court granted appellee’s request for a temporary injunction controlling the use of an easement across appel-lee’s property. Our standard of review is abuse of discretion, South Florida Limousines, Inc. v. Broward County Aviation Dep’t, 512 So.2d 1059 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), and we find no abuse insofar as the easement is concerned. We do agree with the appellant that the trial court erred as a matter of law in enjoining appellant from conveying any portion of his property without offering appellee a right of first refusal. Although the right of first refusal is an issue which was raised by the pleadings, appellee did not seek temporary in-junctive relief in that regard, and the court should not have granted it at this stage of the proceedings. The temporary injunction is therefore affirmed in all respects except for paragraph one which pertains to the right of first refusal.

DELL, KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

766 So. 2d 462, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 11326, 2000 WL 1258321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nastasi-v-thomas-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack