Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

458 So. 2d 305

Powerline Development Corp. v. Assor

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 4, 1984

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1984-09-04

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“does not directly affect the reality itself cannot justify the maintenance of a lis pendens upon it”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 959 So. 2d 758 - Ness Racquet Club, LLC v. RENZI HOLDINGS

Relies on Chicken Unlimited, Inc. v. Bockover · Beefy King International, Inc. v. Veigle · Levitt v. Vermuccio

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1984-09-04

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently October 2012

5 state decisions

301984199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

POWERLINE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Florida Corporation, Petitioner,
v.
Isaac ASSOR, Jose Bentolila, Moses Chacron and Bernard Tetner and Ven Power, N.V., a Netherlands Antilles Corporation, Respondents.

No. 84-1631.

¶1District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

September 4, 1984.
Rehearing Denied October 2, 1984.

¶2*306 Arvin Peltz, Peter R. Lopez, Miami, for petitioner.

¶3Daniels & Hicks and Patrice A. Talisman, Miami, Norman K. Schwarz, Miami Beach, for respondents.

¶4Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6The instant petition for certiorari challenges the refusal to dissolve a lis pendens. The orders under review are quashed because the underlying action, which concerns allegedly fraudulent transactions involving interests in the petitioner-corporation which owns the property, does not directly affect the realty itself and therefore cannot justify the maintenance of a lis pendens upon it. Sunrise Point, Inc. v. Foss,373 So.2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 374 So.2d 99 (Fla. 1979); Hallmark Manufacturing, Inc. v. Lujack Construction Co., Inc.,372 So.2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Worldwide Development-Kendale Lakes West v. Lot Headquarters, Inc.,305 So.2d 271 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); Beefy King International, Inc. v. Veigle,464 F.2d 1102 (5th Cir.1972).

¶7Certiorari granted.

/458/so2d/305 · .json · Public domain