Knight v. Global Contact Lens, Inc., s. 69--147

Decision Date21 March 1969
Docket NumberNos. 69--147,69--171,69--180,s. 69--147
Citation220 So.2d 693
PartiesKarl KNIGHT, Appellant, v. GLOBAL CONTACT LENS, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee. GLOBAL CONTACT LENS, INC., Appellant, v. Karl KNIGHT, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

John H. Connelly, Guilmartin & Bartel, Miami, for Kark Knight.

Robert M. Brake, Coral Gables, for Global Contact Lens, Inc.

Before PEARSON, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Knight was the landlord and Global Contact Lens, Inc. the tenant of certain business premises. The landlord sought to remove the tenant under §§ 83.21 and 83.251, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., by an action filed in the Dade County Civil Court of Record. The tenant counterclaimed for damages at law. Thereafter, the tenant filed suit in the Circuit Court of Dade County asking for two forms of equitable, relief, to-wit: a declaration of the rights between the two parties; and also, an injunction restraining the landlord from prosecuting his action in the Civil Court of Record.

The Circuit Court granted a temporary injunction restraining the landlord from proceeding further with the removal of tenant action in the Civil Court of Record and later, by order dated February 24, 1969 modified said injunction to allow the landlord to proceed, but enjoining enforcement of any judgment which might be rendered in his favor. Knight has taken an interlocutory appeal, contending that the tenant's complaint did not state a cause of action sufficiently sounding in equity to justify issuance of the injunction. After reviewing the allegations of the tenant's complaint, we disagree with Knight's position and affirm the Circuit Court's equity jurisdiction over the cause.

We also feel that this litigation lends itself well to the maxim that equity, once having taken jurisdiction of a case for one purpose, should retain jurisdiction for all purposes to administer full, complete and final relief including legal remedies. 12 Fla.Jur. Equity §§ 43, 44. Here, the tenant cannot present his equitable counterclaim and set-off in the Civil Court of Record because of the jurisdictional limitations applicable to that court. Nevins Drug Company, Inc. v. Bunch, Fla.1953, 63 So.2d 329. Therefore, it was error for the Circuit Court to enter its order modifying temporary injunction on February 24, 1969, inasmuch as the Circuit Court had jurisdiction to grant complete relief, thereby enabling the cause to be disposed of without a multiplicity of law...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • City of Coral Gables v. Wepman, 82-126
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 3 Agosto 1982
    ...Nelson v. Beverly Beach Properties, Inc., 47 So.2d 310 (Fla.1950); Miami v. Keton, 115 So.2d 547 (Fla.1959); Knight v. Global Contact Lens, Inc., 220 So.2d 693 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). A Court of equity has the power to enforce its orders and decrees and has continuing jurisdiction to do so. Hoo......
  • Global Contact Lens, Inc. v. Knight
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 9 Noviembre 1971
    ...in the Circuit Court to restrain the prosecution of the landlord's suit. The temporary injunction was upheld, Knight v. Global Contact Lens, Inc., Fla.App.1969, 220 So.2d 693. After a hearing on the merits, final judgment was entered for the landlord, and the injunction was dissolved; the j......
  • Hutchinson v. Kimzay of Florida, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 27 Mayo 1994
    ...presented as a basis for the entry of the 18 December order. Without reasons, the injunction must fail. Id.; Knight v. Global Contact Lens, Inc., 220 So.2d 693 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). The trial judge also did not require that a bond be posted as provided by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610......
  • Thomas v. English, 83-2258
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 18 Abril 1984
    ...defensively (by motion to abate) or affirmatively (by application for a temporary injunction). See, e.g., Knight v. Global Contact Lens, Inc., 220 So.2d 693 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969), Sarasota County v. Stanton Investment Co. of Missouri, 283 So.2d 152 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973) and Birnholz v. Steisel, 3......
  • 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