Two Islands Development Corporation v. Clarke, ___ So. 3d ___, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D501 (Fla. 3d DCA February 25, 2015)
Three property owners moved for a temporary injunction to prevent the developers of the South Island on which their homes were situated from constructing a sidewalk along their lots. During the hearing on the motion, the developers made an oral motion to permit the developers of the adjacent North Island to intervene because they were indispensable parties. The trial court denied the motion to intervene and entered a temporary injunction, but the appellate court reversed because the developers of the North Island were indispensable parties because they were unable to obtain a building permit or financing for their project on the North Island until the sidewalk on the South Island was completed. A trial court lacks jurisdiction to enter an injunction that would interfere with the rights of nonparties. In this case, the impact of the injunction on the nonparties was sufficient to make them indispensable parties. As a result, the appellate court vacated the temporary injunction and reversed the order denying the motion to intervene. On remand, the interests of nonparties would have to be considered in setting the amount of the bond in the event another injunction were to be entered.
To read more briefs in the Injunctions category of the Kashi Law Letter, please click here, http://www.kashilawletter.com/category/injunctions/.
To read more briefs in the Civil Procedure category of the Kashi Law Letter, please click here, http://www.kashilawletter.com/category/civil-procedure/.