Camji v. Helmsley, 92-1326

Decision Date07 July 1992
Docket NumberNo. 92-1326,92-1326
Citation602 So.2d 617
PartiesVictor CAMJI and Georgina Camji, Appellants, v. Harry B. HELMSLEY, et al., Appellees. 602 So.2d 617, 17 Fla. L. Week. D1627
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Mandler & Silver, and Scott M. Bernstein, Miami, for appellants.

Heller and Chames and Jonathan A. Heller, Miami, Donald J. Harmon, New York City, for appellees.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUBBART and LEVY, JJ.

LEVY, Judge.

Plaintiffs Victor and Georgina Camji, the owners of property in downtown Miami, appeal the trial court's entry of an "Order Preserving the Status Quo" restraining the plaintiffs from removing a garbage bin on their property, which was being used by their neighboring property owners, defendants Harry B. Helmsley, et al. The defendants had maintained the garbage bin on the plaintiffs' property for several years under a claim of the right to an easement, prior to the time the plaintiffs filed this ejectment action seeking damages and to quiet title.

Sometime thereafter, the defendants were advised that the plaintiffs were sending a tow truck and police officer to the property, to forcibly remove the garbage bin. The defendants sought an emergency hearing to enjoin the plaintiffs from removing the garbage bin. In furtherance of obtaining such an injunction, appellees' counsel went to the trial judge's chambers seeking an emergency hearing. After asking appellees' counsel about the nature of the hearing that they were seeking, the trial judge then contacted appellants' counsel by telephone, thus allowing both sides to present their arguments concerning the entry of the injunction. Thereafter, the trial court entered the order which is the subject of this appeal. The order in question, which is entitled "Order Preserving Status Quo", stated that the garbage bin was to remain on the plaintiffs' property until further order from the trial court. The plaintiffs' Emergency Motion to Vacate Injunction Order was denied, and the plaintiffs appeal.

The defendants candidly acknowledge that the "Order Preserving Status Quo" does not meet the requirements for an injunction as set forth by Rule 1.610 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Specifically, the Order does not show that immediate and irreparable injury will result if the injunction is not entered, or that counsel for the defendants had certified in writing regarding any efforts that had been made to give advance notice regarding the hearing, or any reasons why such notice should not have been required....

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Tabet v. Tabet, 94-655
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 12, 1994 to preserve the status quo in order to prevent irreparable harm from occurring before a dispute is resolved." Camji v. Helmsley, 602 So.2d 617, 618 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Considering the facts of this case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the elements necessa......
  • Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Rigby
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 12, 2012
    ...the order the majority says operates to bar appellate relief here as an interlocutory or temporary injunction. See Camji v. Helmsley, 602 So.2d 617, 618 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (“The very purpose of a temporary injunction is to preserve the status quo in order to prevent irreparable harm from oc......
  • Spradley v. Old Harmony Baptist Church
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 27, 1998 the order is nevertheless injunctive and must comply with the requirements for issuance of an injunction. See Camji v. Helmsley, 602 So.2d 617 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (rejecting argument that order only sought to preserve "status quo" by prohibiting appellants' removal of garbage bin because ......
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 8, 2010 resolved. The Order in this case, by preserving the status quo. . . clearly constituted a temporary injunction." Camji v. Helmsley, 602 So.2d 617, 618 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (citations omitted); see also Spradley v. Old Harmony Baptist Church, 721 So.2d 735, 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (holding ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT