From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ZESKIND v. JOCKEY CLUB CONDO. APTS

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 4, 1985
468 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Summary

finding injunction was based on substantial, competent evidence adduced below

Summary of this case from General Electric Co. v. Chuly International, LLC

Opinion

Nos. 84-1461, 84-2067.

April 23, 1985. Rehearing Denied June 4, 1985.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Edward S. Klein, J.

Ann Mason Parker, Leonard Sussman, Miami, for appellants.

Stanley Angel and Cheryl D. Hochberg, North Miami, for appellee.

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


Stanley and Shirley Zeskind [Zeskinds], condominium unit owners, appeal an adverse final judgment entered in favor of Jockey Club Condominium Apartments, Unit No. II, Inc., [Jockey Club], a condominium association, after a non-jury trial below. In the final judgment, the Jockey Club secured an injunction which restrains the Zeskinds from keeping a pet in their condominium unit in violation of the no-pet rule of the Declaration of Condominium; the final judgment also denied a six-count counterclaim filed by the Zeskinds in the cause.

The Zeskinds assert as error on appeal the grant of the above injunction, the denial of a portion of their counterclaim and the award of attorney's fees. We reject these contentions as no error has been demonstrated, in our view, sufficient to upset the judgment appealed from. We reach this result for two reasons.

First, both the injunction and the award of attorney's fees are based on substantial, competent evidence adduced below which we have no authority to disturb on appeal. See Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13, 16 (Fla. 1976); Koeppel v. Koeppel, 351 So.2d 766, 768 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Second, the denial of the portion of the counterclaim relating to common elements within the condominium was entirely correct because, as the trial court found, the action complained of was de minimis in nature and was approved by the Jockey Club's Board of Directors in compliance with the Declaration of Condominium. See Juno By the Sea North Condominium Association v. Manfredonia, 397 So.2d 297, 301-05 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980), pet. for review denied, 402 So.2d 611 (Fla. 1981). The final judgment under review is, in all respects, affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

ZESKIND v. JOCKEY CLUB CONDO. APTS

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 4, 1985
468 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

finding injunction was based on substantial, competent evidence adduced below

Summary of this case from General Electric Co. v. Chuly International, LLC
Case details for

ZESKIND v. JOCKEY CLUB CONDO. APTS

Case Details

Full title:STANLEY ZESKIND AND SHIRLEY ZESKIND, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS, v. JOCKEY CLUB…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jun 4, 1985

Citations

468 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Citing Cases

Kendall Square v. Mears

The trial court's ruling is supported by substantial, competent evidence. See Marrone v. Miami Nat'l Bank,…

General Electric Co. v. Chuly International, LLC

GE amply demonstrated, by competent substantial evidence, sufficient statutory grounds for prejudgment…