Cutler Creek v. Townhouse Ass'n, Inc. v. Cutler Creek Vill. Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 584 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). · Go Syfert
Search
Cutler Creek v. Townhouse Ass'n, Inc. v. Cutler Creek Vill. Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 584 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
9 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Lopez v. Paredes, 653 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 103 Temporary injunction requirements and bond posting3 citing cases“We find that the injunction is defective in that it fails to comply with Rule 1.610(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires the posting of bond to pay costs and damages which could result from the issuance of a temporary injunction.”the opinion's own words at *103 · 2 listed here
  • Lopez v. Paredes, 653 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).published
    Partnership, 610 So.2d 640, 641 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Cutler Creek Village Townhouse Ass’n, Inc. v. Cutler Creek Village Condominium Ass’n, Inc., 584 So.2d 103, 103-04 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
  • Med. Facilities Dev., Inc. v. Little Arch Creek Props., Inc., 656 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).published 2 cites
    Partnership, 610 So.2d 640, 641 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Cutler Creek Village Townhouse Ass'n v. Cutler Creek Village Condominium Ass'n, 584 So.2d 103, 103 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Cushman & Wakefield, Inc. v. Cozart, 561 So.2d 368, 370 (Fla. 2d DCA…
Other citing cases1 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
CUTLER CREEK VILLAGE TOWNHOUSE ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellant,
v.
CUTLER CREEK VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee.
91-1140.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Jul 30, 1991.
Published opinion
584 So. 2d 103
1991 WL 139148
Barkdull, Levy and Gersten.
Cited by 7 opinions  |  Published

Robert C. Eber, for appellant.

Robert E. Dillon, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, LEVY and GERSTEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Cutler Creek Village Townhouse Association, Inc., appeals the issuance of a temporary injunction restraining appellant from using security gates to restrict access into certain areas. We affirm in part, and reverse in part.

We find that the injunction is defective in that it fails to comply with Rule 1.610(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires the posting of bond to pay costs and damages which could result from the issuance of a temporary injunction. See Minimatic Components, Inc. v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 494 So.2d 303 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986).

However, we also find that appellee adequately complied with all other requirements necessary for the issuance of the temporary injunction. Accordingly, we affirm the issuance of the temporary injunction,[*104] but reverse and remand for entry of an appropriate bond.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.