Judges: Sharp
Filed: Jun. 09, 1982
Latest Update: Apr. 07, 2017
Summary: 414 So. 2d 1178 (1982) Robert B. RUSSELL and Russell Florida Lands, Inc., Appellants, v. FLORIDA RANCH LANDS, INC., Appellee. No. 82-12. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District. June 9, 1982. *1179 Gordon H. Harris and Herbert M. Hill, of Gray, Harris & Robinson, P.A., Orlando, for appellants. Edmund T. Woolfolk and Cameron H. Linton, of Woolfolk, Estes & Palmour, P.A., Orlando, for appellee. SHARP, Judge. Robert Russell and Russell Florida Lands, Inc., appeal the lower court's non-f
Summary: 414 So. 2d 1178 (1982) Robert B. RUSSELL and Russell Florida Lands, Inc., Appellants, v. FLORIDA RANCH LANDS, INC., Appellee. No. 82-12. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District. June 9, 1982. *1179 Gordon H. Harris and Herbert M. Hill, of Gray, Harris & Robinson, P.A., Orlando, for appellants. Edmund T. Woolfolk and Cameron H. Linton, of Woolfolk, Estes & Palmour, P.A., Orlando, for appellee. SHARP, Judge. Robert Russell and Russell Florida Lands, Inc., appeal the lower court's non-fi..
More
414 So. 2d 1178 (1982)
Robert B. RUSSELL and Russell Florida Lands, Inc., Appellants,
v.
FLORIDA RANCH LANDS, INC., Appellee.
No. 82-12.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
June 9, 1982.
Gordon H. Harris and Herbert M. Hill, of Gray, Harris & Robinson, P.A., Orlando, for appellants.
Edmund T. Woolfolk and Cameron H. Linton, of Woolfolk, Estes & Palmour, P.A., Orlando, for appellee.
SHARP, Judge.
Robert Russell and Russell Florida Lands, Inc., appeal the lower court's non-final order granting appellee's motion for a temporary injunction. The essential elements which must be proved before a preliminary injunction can be issued are a legal right in the subject matter of the suit, likelihood of irreparable harm because of the unavailability of an adequate remedy at law and a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. Oxford International Bank and Trust, Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 374 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Since none of these elements were established by the testimony or record in this case, there was no foundation upon which to ground a preliminary injunction. Accordingly, it is
REVERSED.
COBB and COWART, JJ., concur.
