Begel v. Hirsch
| Decision Date | 27 September 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-2518,76-2518 |
| Citation | 350 So. 2d 514 |
| Parties | Frank BEGEL, Appellant, v. Ira HIRSCH, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Jerome M. Rosenblum, Hollywood, for appellant.
Jerome F. Pollock, Hollywood, for appellee.
This is an interlocutory appeal by Frank Begel, the defendant in the trial court, from an order granting a temporary injunction which enjoined him from advertising the name "Frank Begel Bail Bonds" in either Dade or Broward Counties. He was allowed to continue writing bail bonds, but was prohibited from advertising in those counties unless he used a fictitious name. He also appeals the trial court's denial of his motion for a protective order against a notice to produce. We affirm the temporary injunction and reverse the order denying the motion for a protective order.
In reference to the temporary injunction, Begel raises eight points on appeal. We have considered each of these and find no reversible error.
Begel's last point, which does not involve the temporary injunction, has merit. The plaintiff, Ira Hirsch, served a notice to produce at deposition which lists, in very broad terms, nineteen categories of items to be produced. The notice recites that the documents sought pertain to the operation of any business by Frank Begel where bonds were written or sold or transacted between 1971 and the present. Some of the items sought are not relevant to the subject matter of this lawsuit, which involves the 1973 sale of Begel's bond business in Dade and Broward Counties to Hirsch, the operation of a competing business by Begel since 1976, and the alleged injuries caused to Hirsch's business by Begel.
The trial court erred in denying Begel's motion for a protective order to the extent that the notice to produce sought production of documents on irrelevant matters....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dade County Medical Ass'n v. Hlis
...Plan v. Kostner, 367 So.2d 276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Salido, 354 So.2d 963 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Begel v. Hirsch, 350 So.2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 361 So.2d 830 (Fla.1978); Reeg v. Fetzer, 78 F.R.D. 34 (W.D.Okl.1976); Payne v. Howard, 75 F.R.D. 465 (D.......
-
Caribbean Sec. Systems, Inc. v. Security Control Systems, Inc.
...v. Servis, 393 So.2d 653 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Argonaut Insurance Company v. Peralta, 358 So.2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Begel v. Hirsch, 350 So.2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). The purpose of modern discovery is to disclose items that may lead to evidence on the issues as framed by the pleadings.......
-
Graphic Associates, Inc. v. Riviana Restaurant Corp.
...subject matter of the litigation are discoverable. Hoogland v. Dollar Land Corp., 330 So.2d 509 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Begel v. Hirsch, 350 So.2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 361 So.2d 830 (Fla.1978). Additionally, Rule 1.280(b)(1) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure requires th......
- Begel v. Hirsch