Tower Credit Corp. v. State by Dickinson

Decision Date01 February 1966
Docket NumberNo. 485,485
PartiesTOWER CREDIT CORPORATION, Consumer Credit Corporation, Indian River Loan Company, Financial Corporation of Florida, Central Factors, Inc., R. C. Fernon, Dorothy Fernon and Fred Koepp, Appellants v. STATE of Florida, by Fred O. DICKINSON, Jr., Comptroller, Earl Faircloth, Attorney General, and Broward Williams, State Treasurer, as and constituting the Florida Securities Commission, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Thomas N. Holloway and Miller Walton, of Walton, Lantaff, Schroeder, Atkins, Carson & Wahl, Miami, and Robert J. Randolph, Stuart, for appellants.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Milton J. Wallace, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for appellee Florida Securities Commission.

PER CURIAM.

The defendants appeal from an interlocutory order in chancery extending the scope of a prior temporary restraining order issued upon the complaint of the Florida Securities Commission. The complaint alleged acts and practices in violation of the Florida 'Blue Sky Law', F.S.A. ch. 517, sworn to by an assistant attorney general and supported by an affidavit of a field investigator for the commission. The court granted the commission's motion for temporary restraining order and the appointment of a receiver without notice, and two days later the order was amended by changing the receiver. Three days later on a motion of the commission, the court permitted certain supplements to the complaint, including the addition of parties-defendants and an appointment of a receiver for an additional corporate defendant. Certain of the defendants filed a notice of appearance by their attorneys, and then the commission filed its motion for an extension of the temporary restraining order previously entered. The motion was sworn to and supported by affidavits of the receiver reciting certain facts occurring subsequent to the initial restraining order. The court granted the motion and entered an order extending the scope of the prior restraining order to include enjoining and restraining the defendants from calling or holding a corporate directors' meeting and from filing any new suits in any other state or federal court, except appeals, without obtaining specific permission from the court . It is from this order modifying and extending the scope of the prior restraining order that the defendants appeal.

Defendants did not move the dissolve the injunction but short-circuited the trial court procedure by this appeal. In the absence of a motion to dissolve, review of a temporary restraining order has been denied. Greater Miami Development Corporation v. Pender, 1940, 142 Fla. 390, 194 So. 867. We strongly recommend filing a motion to dissolve and a hearing where the facts may be fully developed and an order entered. In the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Williams v. Ferrentino
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 2, 1967
    ...views. See Gross v. Gross, Fla.App.1961, 131 So.2d 487; Curtis Pools, Inc. v. Fulton, Fla.App.1959, 115 So.2d 442; Tower Credit Corp. v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 255; and Bailey v. Snyder, Fla.App.1965, 175 So.2d Overlooking the loose pleadings and proceedings below, and indulging a r......
  • TD Bank, N.A. v. Graubard, 5D14–1505.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 14, 2015
    ...before it for consideration.”Elmore v. Fla. Power & Light Co., 895 So.2d 475, 478 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (quoting Tower Credit Corp. v. State, 183 So.2d 255, 256 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966) ). In contrast, when a party seeks to “prove some matter contained in the record of a case other than the one be......
  • State v. Romanez, 88-2954
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 9, 1989
    ...90 So.2d 109, 111 (Fla.1956) (same); McNish v. State, 47 Fla. 69, 36 So. 176, 177 (1904) (same); Tower Credit Corp. v. State by Dickinson, 183 So.2d 255, 256 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966) (same); § 90.202(6), Fla.Stat. Finally, the balance of the state's arguments presents no departure from essential......
  • Upper Keys Marine Const., Inc. v. Alonzo Cothron, Inc., 86-1696
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 28, 1987
    ...Inc. v. Ranger Ins. Co., 330 So.2d 467, 469 (Fla.1976); Kelley v. Kelley, 75 So.2d 191, 193-94 (Fla.1954); Tower Credit Corp. v. State, 183 So.2d 255, 256 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966). ...
  • 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