Case ID: so2d_415/html/0755-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

F. V. INVESTMENTS, N. V., a Netherlands Antilles Corp., and Riverpoint, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellants, v. SICMA CORP., a Florida corporation, Appellee.
    No. 81-2421.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    May 18, 1982.
    Rehearing Denied July 15, 1982.
    Blackwell, Walker, Gray, Powers, Flick & Hoehl and James E. Tribble, Miami, for appellants.
    Helliwell, Melrose & DeWolf and Robert J. Schaffer, Miami, for appellee.
    Before SCHWARTZ and NESBITT, JJ., and PEARSON, TILLMAN, (Ret.), Associate Judge.
   PER CURIAM.

The preliminary injunction issued pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(a) is reversed on two grounds. First, the acts enjoined by the injunction are not specified with such reasonable definiteness and certainty that the defendants bound by the decree would know what they must refrain from doing without the matter being left to speculation and conjecture. See Moore v. City Dry Cleaners & Laundry, Inc., 41 So.2d 865, 871 (Fla.1949). Secondly, the complaint for injunctive relief fails to set forth clearly, definitely, and unequivocally sufficient allegations to warrant the intervention of a court of equity. Cramp v. Board of Public Instruction of Orange County, 118 So.2d 541 (Fla.1960); Stanton v. Harris, 152 Fla. 736, 13 So.2d 17 (Fla.1943).

Reversed.