Seinfeld v. Commercial Bank & Trust Co.

445 So. 2d 1055, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11730
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 7, 1984·No. No. 83-1172·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

BASKIN, Judge.

Treating appellants’ challenge to the trial court’s Order denying a motion to dissolve notice of lis pendens or to set bond as a petition for writ of certiorari, Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040(c), we deny the writ. We hold that the supplementary proceedings alleging fraudulent conveyance of property were predicated upon a recorded judgment and duly recorded deeds and that the failure to establish the necessity for bond under Section 48.23(3), Florida Statutes (1981), or that lis pendens was inappropriate, precludes relief.

Petition for certiorari denied.

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

Seinfeld v. Commercial Bank & Trust Co., 445 So. 2d 1055, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11730 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

445 So. 2d 1055 (Seinfeld v. Commercial Bank & Trust Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

First S. Dev. v. Chandler & Assoc.
472 So. 2d 878 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)