Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2017

Pendergraft v. C.H.

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided September 7, 2017 · Cohen, Orfinger, Berger

225 So. 3d 420; 2017 WL 3896921; 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 12920 (Southern Reporter, Third Series)

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

GARY HOUSMAN vs PEGGY HOUSMAN, GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON AND CO-GUARDIAN OF THE PROPERTY OF THE WARD, HIROKO HOUSMAN AND MARK HOUSMAN, CO-GUARDIAN OF THE PROPERTY OF THE WARD, HIROKO HOUSMAN (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2023)
GLORIA F. BERK-FIALKOFF, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ALAN FIALKOFF vs WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, IN ITS CAPACITY AS TRUSTEE, AND H-BAY MINISTRIES, INC., A TEXAS NON-PROFIT CORPORATION (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2023)
Credo LLC v. Speyside Investments Corp. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants appeal from an order freezing their assets in proceedings supplementary filed below. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

An order freezing assets for further determination of the ownership right to those assets is in the nature of an injunction. TJ Mgmt. Grp., L.L.C. v. Zidon, 990 So.2d 623, 625 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). When an appeal is taken from the entry of a temporary injunction, Appellants cannot raise arguments that should have been, but were not, raised at the hearing in the trial court. See id. at 626. However, here, the trial court failed to require Appellee to post a bond, a ministerial act. See Fla. High Sch. Activities Ass’n v. Mander ex rel Mander, 932 So.2d 314, 315-16 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that trial court cannot waive' bond requirement nor can bond be nominal); Cushman & Wakefield, Inc. v. Cozart, 561 So.2d 368, 370 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (“A trial court must require the mov-ant to post an injunction bond before it enters a temporary injunction.”). Though the circuit court, can determine the appropriate amount of the bond after hearing evidence from all-parties, the court is without discretion to determine whether to set bond in the first place. See Bellach v. Huggs of Naples, Inc., 704 So.2d 679, 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).

For these reasons, we affirm the order freezing Appellants’ assets, but remand for the trial court to determine an appropriate injunction bond.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED. ,

COHEN, C.J., ORFINGER and BERGER, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.