TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Burnstein v. 5838 Condominium, Inc.

Henry BURNSTEIN v. 5838 CONDOMINIUM, INC.

Burnstein v. 5838 Condo., Inc., 430 So. 2d 572 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
May 3, 1983
Docket
No. 83-235
Judges
Bark, Dull, Ferguson, Schwartz
Citations
430 So. 2d 5721983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19284

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

Where a condominium association obtained a preliminary injunction against a tenant for noise abatement during the pendency of the main claims — a complaint for eviction and counterclaim for breach of lease agreement — the condominium association was not a prevailing party for the purpose of attorney’s fees because the preliminary injunction was entered as an interlocutory order, and the case remained to be determined on the merits. There can be no prevailing party for the purpose of awarding attorney’s fees until there is an end to the litigation as by judgment or other dis-positive order. See Steinhardt v. Eastern Shores White House Association, Inc., 413 So.2d 785 (Fla. 3d. DCA 1982); Midway Shopping Mall, Inc. v. Airtech Air Conditioning, Inc., 253 So.2d 900 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971).

A preliminary injunction does not purport to decide the merits of a cause of action but merely serves to maintain the status quo pending a final determination on those merits; the provisions of such injunction may be merged in, or dissolved by, the final decree. Ladner v. Plaza Del Prado Condominium Association, Inc., 423 So.2d 927 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Adoption Hot Line, Inc. v. State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 385 So.2d 682 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); North Dade Water Co. v. Adken Land Co., 114 So.2d 347 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959), cert. denied, 117 So.2d 496 (Fla.1959).

The remaining points in this appeal are without merit.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

1987: 12009: 12011: 12017: 119872026peak 1987 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. South Fla. Limo., Inc. v. Broward Cty. Av., Dept.512 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)
  2. Nine Island Avenue Condominium Ass'n v. Siegel23 So. 3d 1248 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)
  3. In re Accredited Home Lender Holding Co.441 B.R. 443 (Bankr. D. Del. 2011)
  4. Salame v. 1st Priority Restoration, Inc.221 So. 3d 706 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

Most recent

  1. Salame v. 1st Priority Restoration, Inc.221 So. 3d 706 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)
  2. In re Accredited Home Lender Holding Co.441 B.R. 443 (Bankr. D. Del. 2011)
  3. Nine Island Avenue Condominium Ass'n v. Siegel23 So. 3d 1248 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)
  4. South Fla. Limo., Inc. v. Broward Cty. Av., Dept.512 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

DepthCaseCited by
Ladner v. Plaza DEL Prado, ETC., 423 So. 2d 927 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982) 48
North Dade Water Co. v. Adken Land Co., 114 So. 2d 347 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1959) 17
Steinhardt v. Eastern Shores White House Assoc., Inc., 413 So. 2d 785 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982) 16
Adoption Hot Line, Inc. v. ST. ETC., 385 So. 2d 682 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980) 11
Midway Shop. Mall, Inc. v. Airtech Air Con., Inc., 253 So. 2d 900 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971) 9

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list