Case Name: F. V. INVESTMENTS, N. V., a Netherlands Antilles Corp., and Riverpoint, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellants, v. SICMA CORP., a Florida corporation, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1982-05-18
Citations: 415 So. 2d 755
Docket Number: No. 81-2421
Parties: F. V. INVESTMENTS, N. V., a Netherlands Antilles Corp., and Riverpoint, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellants, v. SICMA CORP., a Florida corporation, Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ and NESBITT, JJ., and PEARSON, TILLMAN, (Ret.), Associate Judge.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 415
Pages: 755–756

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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 unequivo cally 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.