Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Matthew Galloway, M.D. and Galloway Orthopedics, LLC v. Orthopedic Spericalists, LLP
Date: 08-16-2017
Case Number: 2D15-5437
Judge: Kelly
Court: Florida Court of Appeal, Second District on appeal from the Circuit Court, Pinellas County
Plaintiff's Attorney: Marie A. Borland and Thomas Cope
Defendant's Attorney: Brandon Vesely and Nicole Ziegler
Description:
In appeal number 2D15-5437, Dr. Matthew Galloway and Galloway
Orthopedics, LLC, ask this court to reverse the trial court's order denying a motion to
- 2 -
dissolve an ex parte temporary injunction. The injunction was entered against Dr.
Galloway after his former employer, Orthopedic Specialists, LLC, sued him for breach of
the restrictive covenants in his employment agreement. The only issue before us at this
juncture is whether the trial court abused its discretion when it denied the motion to
dissolve the injunction. See Thomas v. Osler Med., Inc., 963 So. 2d 896, 899 (Fla. 5th
DCA 2007) (stating the standard of review in determining whether a trial court properly
refused to dissolve an injunction is abuse of discretion); Gold Coast Chem. Corp. v.
Goldberg, 668 So. 2d 326, 327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (stating a trial court's ruling on a
temporary injunction is reviewed for an abuse of discretion). Having reviewed the
record in light of the arguments raised in this appeal, we conclude the appellants have
failed to demonstrate that the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to dissolve
the temporary injunction. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's order. We also affirm
without discussion the contempt order challenged by appellants in appeal number
2D16-241.
In so ruling, we remind the parties and the trial court that "[a] temporary
injunction does not decide the merits of a case; no full hearing has been conducted."
Gold Coast, 668 So. 2d at 327. Neither the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions
of law nor our determination that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying
the motion to dissolve the injunction will be binding at a trial on the merits. See Univ. of
Texas v. Camenisch, 451 U.S. 390, 395 (1981); Klak v. Eagles' Reserve Homeowners'
Ass'n., 862 So. 2d 947, 952 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Hialeah, Inc. v. Calder Race Course,
Inc., 620 So. 2d 261, 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).
Orthopedics, LLC, ask this court to reverse the trial court's order denying a motion to
- 2 -
dissolve an ex parte temporary injunction. The injunction was entered against Dr.
Galloway after his former employer, Orthopedic Specialists, LLC, sued him for breach of
the restrictive covenants in his employment agreement. The only issue before us at this
juncture is whether the trial court abused its discretion when it denied the motion to
dissolve the injunction. See Thomas v. Osler Med., Inc., 963 So. 2d 896, 899 (Fla. 5th
DCA 2007) (stating the standard of review in determining whether a trial court properly
refused to dissolve an injunction is abuse of discretion); Gold Coast Chem. Corp. v.
Goldberg, 668 So. 2d 326, 327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (stating a trial court's ruling on a
temporary injunction is reviewed for an abuse of discretion). Having reviewed the
record in light of the arguments raised in this appeal, we conclude the appellants have
failed to demonstrate that the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to dissolve
the temporary injunction. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's order. We also affirm
without discussion the contempt order challenged by appellants in appeal number
2D16-241.
In so ruling, we remind the parties and the trial court that "[a] temporary
injunction does not decide the merits of a case; no full hearing has been conducted."
Gold Coast, 668 So. 2d at 327. Neither the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions
of law nor our determination that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying
the motion to dissolve the injunction will be binding at a trial on the merits. See Univ. of
Texas v. Camenisch, 451 U.S. 390, 395 (1981); Klak v. Eagles' Reserve Homeowners'
Ass'n., 862 So. 2d 947, 952 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Hialeah, Inc. v. Calder Race Course,
Inc., 620 So. 2d 261, 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).
Outcome:
Affirmed.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Matthew Galloway, M.D. and Galloway Orthopedics, LLC v. O...?
The outcome was: Affirmed.
Which court heard Matthew Galloway, M.D. and Galloway Orthopedics, LLC v. O...?
This case was heard in Florida Court of Appeal, Second District on appeal from the Circuit Court, Pinellas County, FL. The presiding judge was Kelly.
Who were the attorneys in Matthew Galloway, M.D. and Galloway Orthopedics, LLC v. O...?
Plaintiff's attorney: Marie A. Borland and Thomas Cope. Defendant's attorney: Brandon Vesely and Nicole Ziegler.
When was Matthew Galloway, M.D. and Galloway Orthopedics, LLC v. O... decided?
This case was decided on August 16, 2017.