Legal Opinion

Hopkins v. Hopkins

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 25, 1993No. 93-0903Published

1Per curiam

We reverse a temporary injunction restraining appellant from disposing of personal property described in the complaint as “inventory, including motor vehicles, equipment, trade fixtures, tools, parts and accessories,” because an injunction should not be granted for the retention of personal property unless the property is unique. Esposito v. Homing, 416 So.2d 896 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). The property described in this complaint does not meet that requirement. In addition, the temporary injunction is defective because it fails to “specify the reasons for entry,” as required by rule 1.610(c), Fla.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Esposito v. HorningDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
  2. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc. v. Greenspoon & Marder, P.A.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API