Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 07-15-2022
Case Style:
FAREDA SANDS, vs ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING & FINANCIAL CRIMES INSTITUTE, LLC
Case Number: 21-1852
Judge:
Alexander S. Bokor
Court:
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
On Appeal From The Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County
Reemberto Diaz
Judge
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800
Defendant's Attorney: The Foodman Firm, P.A., and Daniel Foodman
Description:
Miami, Florida - Money Laundering lawyer represented Appellant with appealing a temporary injunction executed with her former employer.
Fareda Sands appeals the trial court’s grant of a temporary injunction
enjoining her from engaging in any activity violating a non-disclosure, nonsolicitation, and non-competition agreement executed with her former
employer. We agree with the trial court’s findings that the employer satisfied
all elements for a temporary injunction by demonstrating a substantial
likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm, and that an injunction
would serve the public interest. See Fla. Dep’t of Health v. Florigrown, LLC,
317 So. 3d 1101, 1110 (Fla. 2021) (discussing required elements for a
temporary injunction). Thus, we affirm the issuance of the injunction.
However, we reverse and remand in part because the trial court did
not conduct an evidentiary hearing or otherwise allow the parties to present
evidence as to the amount of the injunction bond. See Fla. R. Civ. P.
1.610(b) (“No temporary injunction shall be entered unless a bond is given
by the movant in an amount the court deems proper, conditioned for the
payment of costs and damages sustained by the adverse party if the adverse
party is wrongfully enjoined.”); Pledger Tr. Series 28, LLC v. Apeiron
Holdings Miami, LLC, 306 So. 3d 1115, 1116 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (affirming
in part as to merits of injunction, but reversing and remanding in part for
evidentiary hearing where “Pledger was not given an opportunity to present
evidence on the amount of the bond”); TJ Mgmt. Grp., LLC v. Zidon, 990 So.
3
2d 623, 626 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (affirming denial of motion to dissolve
injunction and remanding for trial court to conduct evidentiary hearing on
injunction bond)
Outcome: Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: