Provident Mgmt. Corp. v. City of Treasure Island

Provident Mgmt. Corp. v. City of Treasure Island

Opinion

 [*482]  PARIENTE, J.

REVISED OPINION

We have for review a decision of the Second District Court of Appeal certifying the following question to be of great public importance:

DO THE LIMITATIONS ON LIABILITY IN SECTION 768.28, FLORIDA STATUTES (1989), APPLY TO A CLAIM FOR WRONGFUL INJUNCTION AGAINST A CITY THAT WAS NOT REQUIRED TO POST AN INJUNCTION BOND?

 City of Treasure Island v. Provident Mgmt. Corp., 738 So. 2d 357, 362 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)  [**2]  ("Provident II"). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons explained in this opinion, we answer the certified question in the negative.

BACKGROUND

This is the second time this case has been before us and we detailed the facts of this case in our earlier decision. See  Provident Mgmt. Corp. v. City of Treasure Island, 718 So. 2d 738, 738-39 (Fla. 1998) ("Provident I"). In short, many property owners at the Land's End condominium complex employed Provident Management Corporation ("Provident") as a rental agent to rent their units on a short-term basis. See id. at 738. The City of Treasure Island ("City") issued a cease and desist order to both Provident and the unit owners, informing them that short-term rentals violated the City's local zoning code. See id. The City thereafter sought a temporary injunction barring Provident from acting as a rental agent for Land's End properties. See id. In response, Provident requested that the trial court require the City to post a bond and the colloquy proceeded as follows:

MR. FERGUSON (counsel for Provident): Sure. There is a bond issue here. It's undisputed,  [**3]  I think, from the testimony, that these people can lose substantial income.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.