CopyCited 76 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2000 WL 986399
...Millennium Communications, Inc. and Advanced Marketing and Research, Inc. (collectively "Millennium") appeal a temporary injunction entered in favor of the Department of Legal Affairs ("Department") pursuant to The Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA"), section 501.207(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1997)....
...ther acts and practices alleged therein; reimbursement to all consumers; and to assess Millennium civil penalties in the amount of $10,000 for each act or practice found to be in violation of chapter 501, part II, Florida Statutes (1997) pursuant to section 501.2075, Florida Statutes (1997)....
...City of Jacksonville,
659 So.2d 1046, 1047 (Fla.1995); Storer Communications, Inc. v. State, Dept. of Legal Affairs,
591 So.2d 238, 239-40 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Harvey v. Wittenberg,
384 So.2d 940, 941 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); see also Escudero v. Hasbun,
689 So.2d 1144, 1146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). However, because section
501.207(1)(b) expressly authorizes the Department to seek injunctive relief on behalf of the state, the Department does not have to establish irreparable harm, lack of an adequate legal remedy or public interest....
CopyCited 14 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal
...lord allegedly made in letters notifying tenants of rental increases and seeks injunction of "further violations" of section 83.753. The trial court dismissed the complaint; the State appeals the dismissal of Counts I through IV, but not of Count V. Section
501.207(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1979), the authority for Count I, allows *1175 the enforcing authority to bring "an action to enjoin a supplier who has violated this part." [1] "Supplier" is defined in section
501.203(3) as "a seller, les...
CopyCited 11 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...er this section against a retailer who has, in good faith, engaged in the dissemination of claims of a manufacturer or wholesaler without actual knowledge that it violated this part. As contrasted to an action brought by an enforcing authority under Section 501.207(1)(a) or (b), this statute makes it clear that a plaintiff seeking damages must show not only that a defendant engaged in unfair or deceptive trade practices but also that those practices caused injury to the plaintiff....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1999 WL 391858
...We agree and write solely to clarify an aspect of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act contains a comprehensive *1148 administrative scheme of enforcing consumer rights and punishing those who engage in unfair trade practices. See § 501.207, Fla....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...This is an appeal from an order dismissing a complaint filed by the State Attorney seeking injunctive relief against the appellees, Alma C. Murdock and Hal Russ, under the provisions of Part II of Chapter 501 of the Florida Statutes. The complaint specifically relied on the authority granted in Section 501.207(1)(b) "to enjoin a supplier who ......
...[2] Such broad language would appear to include real estate sales, especially in light of the legislative directive to consider decisions of the Federal Trade Commission in construing the provisions of Chapter 501. [3] However, we cannot ignore the specific language used by the legislature in Section 501.207(1)(b) restricting its application to a "supplier" as is defined in the statute itself....
...We note that other provisions of Chapter 501 provide for actions against alleged violators of the act without restricting the actions to "suppliers," so the appellant is not without relief. [4] However, the complaint involved here limited the relief *761 sought to that provided in Section
501.207(1)(b); and, accordingly, the order of the trial court is affirmed. MAGER, C.J., and ALDERMAN, J., concur. NOTES [1] Section
501.203(1), Florida Statutes. [2] Section
501.204(1), Florida Statutes. [3] Section
501.204(2), Florida Statutes. [4] For example see Sections
501.207(1)(a) and
501.208.
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...We must emphasize the word "unwary," however, because of the express limitation in the aforesaid definition of "consumer transaction" which limits the business opportunity within the protection of the act to one in which the consumer "has not been previously engaged." Subsection (3) of Section 501.207 of the act provides that in any action brought under the act "the court may make appropriate orders ......
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2001 WL 1190971
...of Legal Affairs, State of Fla.,
761 So.2d 1256 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) ("Millennium I"). The petitioner sued Millennium Communications, Inc. and Advanced Marketing and Research, *257 Inc. (collectively "Millennium") under Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA"), section
501.207(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1997), seeking an injunction, civil penalties and other statutory relief afforded under FDUTPA in connection with Millennium's promotion and sale of a credit card kit....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2014 WL 2040853, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 7574
...law, an action to enjoin a person who has violated, is violating, or is likely to violate the law, or an action on behalf of one or more consumers or governmental entities for the actual damages caused by an act or practice in violation of the law. § 501.207(1)(a)-(c), Fla. Stat. (2011). A FDUTPA action may not be brought more than four years after the occurrence of a violation or more than two years after the last payment in a transaction involved in a violation of the law. § 501.207(5), Fla....
...or allege that the sought-after damages were based upon finance charges or fees as a result of delinquency. In affirming as to the dismissal of Count 8, we are mindful that Appellant also sought injunctive relief and civil penalties in the count. As section 501.207(1) provides, the enforcing authority may bring an action under FDUTPA for a declaratory judgment, for an injunction, or for actual damages on behalf of consumers....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1991 WL 138900
...BURDEN OF PROOF Generally, to obtain a temporary injunction with notice a party must establish: a) irreparable harm; b) a clear legal right to the relief requested; c) the lack of an adequate remedy of law; and d) public interest *240 However, because section 501.207(1)(b) authorizes the Department to seek injunctive relief, it did not have to establish irreparable harm, lack of an adequate remedy at law or public interest....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 1044, 2011 WL 309318
...cKenzie] and/or related third parties." In Fonte, this court found that a class action ban was not violative of public policy in part because of the availability of the enforcing authority to bring actions for the benefit of consumers. Under FDUTPA, section 501.207(1)(c) permits the enforcing authority to bring "an action on behalf of one or more consumers ....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 12821, 2016 WL 4445942
...Appellants further argue trial court error in determining appellee AG’s likelihood of success on the merits. The AG does not have to establish irreparable harm, lack of an adequate legal remedy, or public interest as ordinarily required for a temporary injunction, since Section 501.207 authorizes the enforcing authority to seek injunctive relief....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida
...pe of telemarketing and prohibiting him from advertising, marketing, or selling any debt-relief product or service. The FTC Act and FDUTPA permit the Court to enter such an injunction under appropriate circumstances. 15 U.S.C. § 53 (b) ; Fla. Stat. § 501.207 (1)(b)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 20856, 2011 WL 6847811
...eneral (OAG) erroneously failed to provide the names of the defrauded consumers. However, there exists no procedural rule, statutory provision, or controlling case requiring the OAG to name consumers on whose behalf it is litigating a FDUTPA action. Section 501.207(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2006), authorizes the OAG to bring an action “on behalf of one or more consumers or governmental entities for the actual damages caused by an act or practice in violation of this part.” In addition, section 501.207(3) authorizes a trial court to “make appropriate orders ......
...The OAG’s *80 complaint was not included in the opinion; however, the opinion noted that the question before the court was “whether the State Attorney may obtain damages on behalf of the State” pursuant to FDUTPA. Id. In concluding the OAG could not, the court stated in pertinent part: 501.207(l)(c) explicitly provides all actions for actual damages shall be brought on behalf of an aggrieved consumer....
...the evidence already presented at trial regarding his guilt. For these reasons, we affirm. AFFIRMED. HAWKES and ROBERTS, JJ., concur. Since this opinion, the statute has been changed to allow the OAG to seek damages on behalf of a state agency. See § 501.207, Fla....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 19932, 2011 WL 6183590
...on has engaged in, or is engaging in, an act or practice that violates this part.” §
501.206(1). FDUTPA also authorizes the OAG to bring an action seeking declaratory or injunctive relief, or to bring an action for damages on behalf of consumers. §
501.207(1)....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15810
..., Judge. Kenneth Kasha, who was respondent in proceedings brought pursuant to Florida’s “little FTC Act”, complains that the Department of Legal Affairs erred in reversing a “no probable cause” finding by a hearing examiner. As required by Section 501.207, Florida Statutes (1977), the Agency conducted a hearing to determine whether there was probable cause to institute a civil proceeding against Kasha for allegedly fraudulent real estate practices....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15662
...has the practical effect of enjoining him from lawfully performing certain of his statutory and constitutional duties. The petitioner has been designated by the Florida Legislature as the state official responsible for enforcing the little FTC act. Section 501.207, Florida Statutes (1975) authorizes him to bring an action on behalf of all consumers for damages caused by acts or practices performed in violation of the act....
CopyPublished | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
...thus be “honest corporations” for standing purposes. Perlman
moved for reconsideration and for leave to amend, but the district
court denied both of those motions.
On appeal, Perlman argues that he has standing because he
was appointed pursuant to Section 501.207(3) of the Florida Decep-
tive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA)....
...We hold that even assuming that
*Honorable Anne Conway, United States District Judge for the Middle District
of Florida, sitting by designation.
USCA11 Case: 21-10432 Date Filed: 06/27/2022 Page: 3 of 23
21-10432 Opinion of the Court 3
Section 501.207(3) applies, it does not rectify the standing issue in
Isaiah because it does not expressly address the imputation of
wrongful acts between the Receivership Entities themselves and
their insiders....
...1341 (2021), we recently held that a
court-appointed receiver is no longer an appropriate equitable remedy under
Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act. FTC v. On Point Cap.
Partners LLC, 17 F.4th 1066, 1078 (11th Cir. 2021). However, because this
case also involved Section 501.207(3) of the FDUTPA, which authorizes the
court to appoint a receiver, our holding in On Point Capital Partners is not
dispositive of this appeal.
USCA11 Case: 21-10432 Date Filed: 06/27/2022 Page: 5 of 23
21-10432...
...Notably, Perlman did not move to amend his complaint
to include the requisite allegation and thereby attempt to cure the
standing issue. Instead, Perlman responded to PNC’s motion by
arguing that he did have standing, notwithstanding Isaiah, because
he was appointed under Section 501.207(3) of the Florida
USCA11 Case: 21-10432 Date Filed: 06/27/2022 Page: 6 of 23
6 Opinion of the Court 21-10432
Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices ACT (FDUTPA), which au-
thorizes a court-appointed receiver “to bring actions in the name
of and on behalf of the defendant enterprise, without regard to any
wrongful acts that were committed by the enterprise . . . .” Fla.
Stat. § 501.207(3)....
...Receiver for standing
purposes. In support of his argument that he was appointed under
the FDUTPA, Perlman cited to various docket entries from the En-
forcement Action.
PNC then replied to Perlman by arguing that he was not ap-
pointed under Section 501.207 of the FDUTPA, but rather under
Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA)....
...Since the receiver “obtains
only the rights of actions and remedies” of the corporation in re-
ceivership, it follows that the receiver likewise would not have suf-
fered an injury for purposes of bringing such claims.
Even though the district court did not address Section
501.207(3) of the FDUTPA, that statute does not impact the re-
quirement that Perlman must allege the presence of at least one
innocent director or stockholder....
...ated from the
USCA11 Case: 21-10432 Date Filed: 06/27/2022 Page: 9 of 23
21-10432 Opinion of the Court 9
Receivership Entities and the Receivership Entities could not have
suffered an injury. Section 501.207(3)’s language that a receiver
may bring actions without regard to the wrongful acts of the de-
fendant enterprise does not correct this deficiency in Perlman’s
complaint.
Like the receiver in Isaiah, Perlman is bringing Fl...
...rship En-
tities cannot be said to have suffered an injury.
Perlman concedes that he cannot include an allegation of an
innocent director or stockholder in his complaint. See Oral Argu-
ment Recording at 7:44–7:52. Thus, we must determine if Section
501.207(3) cures this deficiency....
...the court
may make appropriate orders, including but not lim-
ited to, appointment of a . . . receiver . . . to bring ac-
tions in the name of and on behalf of the defendant
enterprise, without regard to any wrongful acts that
were committed by the enterprise.
Fla. Stat. § 501.207(3).
USCA11 Case: 21-10432 Date Filed: 06/27/2022 Page: 10 of 23
10 Opinion of the Court 21-10432
A plain reading of this statute tells us three things. One, Sec-
tion 501.207(3) provides that a receivership is an appropriate rem-
edy in an enforcement action involving violations of the FDUTPA.
Two, the court can appoint a receiver to bring actions on behalf of
the Receivership Entities....
...corpo-
ration’s insiders and the corporation itself. Instead, it only ad-
dresses the relationship between the receiver and the corporations
in receivership or insiders of those corporations.
Perlman does not cite to any cases interpreting Section
501.207(3), so we are limited to the plain language of the statute.
While the statute might provide that the wrongful acts of the Re-
ceivership Entities are not imputed to Perlman, this does not
change the fact that absent an allegation of a...
...: 11 of 23
21-10432 Opinion of the Court 11
suffered an injury for purposes of common law tort claims against
third parties. Therefore, even assuming that Perlman was ap-
pointed as a receiver under Section 501.207(3), that statute does not
change the outcome of this case.
IV. CONCLUSION
While the parties spend much of their briefs disputing the
applicability of Section 501.207(3) of the FDUTPA, we assume for
purposes of this appeal that the statute applies. However, we hold
that Section 501.207(3) does not overcome Isaiah’s mandate that
Perlman must allege the presence of at least one innocent director
or stockholder to have standing to bring his aiding and abetting
claims against PNC....
...Further, PNC’s argument that
the Supreme Court’s decision in AMG Capital deprives this court of subject
matter jurisdiction is without merit. This case is distinguishable from AMG
Capital because it involves not only Section 13(b) of the FTCA, but also Sec-
tion 501.207(3) of the FDUTPA, which authorizes the court to appoint a re-
ceiver.
USCA11 Case: 21-10432 Date Filed: 06/27/2022 Page: 12 of 23
21-10432 ROSENBAUM, J., Dissenting 1
ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judge, Dissenting:
“Corporations are creatures of state law.” Burks v....
...So it makes sense that “corporate law is
overwhelmingly the province of the states.” Freedman v.
magicJackVocaltec Ltd.,
963 F.3d 1125, 1132 (11th Cir. 2020) (cita-
tion and quotation marks omitted). And here, the State of Florida
spoke clearly in 2006, when it amended Florida Statutes §
501.207(3) of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act
(“FDUTPA”) to effectively define a corporation in the hands of a
Florida receiver as a different entity (for purposes of standing in
FDUTPA-authorized claims) than the alter-eg...
...of the alter-ego
corporation NorthAmerican, did not have standing to seek dam-
ages from third parties for injuries NorthAmerican allegedly helped
the third parties to inflict upon itself.
II. The Florida legislature amended Florida Statutes
§ 501.207(3) in 2006 to ensure that a receiver acting on behalf
of a former alter-ego corporation had standing to pursue
claims against third parties who allegedly aided and abetted
the former alter-ego corporation in carrying out...
...nd of Free-
man’s conclusion that receivers of predecessor alter-ego corpora-
tions could not pursue a cause of action against third parties be-
cause they stood in the predecessor corporation’s shoes. So in
2006, the Florida legislature amended § 501.207(3) of FDUTPA to
enable a receiver “to pursue an action under [FDUTPA] on behalf
of a defendant corporation in receivership against a third party who
played some role in the alleged wrongdoing.” Fla....
...21-10432 ROSENBAUM, J., Dissenting 5
added the words, “to bring actions in the name of and on behalf of
the defendant enterprise, without regard to any wrongful acts that
were committed by the enterprise” to § 501.207(3). 2
Obviously, the Florida legislature went to the trouble of add-
ing these words to § 501.207(3) to change the effect of the statute.
2 The emphasized portions below show the changes that the 2006 amendment
made to § 501.207(3):
(3) Upon motion of the enforcing authority or any interested
party in any action brought under subsection (1), the court
may make appropriate orders, including, but not limited to,
appointment of a general o...
...After all, the added text specifies that a receiver acting
on behalf of a corporation is empowered “to bring actions in the
name of and on behalf of the defendant enterprise, without regard
to any wrongful acts that were committed by the enterprise.” FLA.
STAT. § 501.207(3) (emphasis added)....
...poration.
But the Majority Opinion’s interpretation of the amendment
renders the amendment a nullity and contradicts the amendment’s
plain language. In the Majority Opinion’s view, the amendment
“tells us three things”:
One, Section 501.207(3) provides that a receivership
is an appropriate remedy in an enforcement action in-
volving violations of the FDUTPA....
...thorize the receiver to bring actions on behalf of only those corpo-
rations that had at least one innocent director or shareholder—pro-
vides for precisely the same state of the law as when Freeman is-
sued and before the Florida legislature amended § 501.207(3)....
...In my view,
the plain language, as I have explained, identifies that function: to
enable the receiver of a former alter-ego corporation to bring
claims against third parties for allegedly aiding and abetting the for-
mer alter-ego corporation’s intentional torts.
The legislative history of the amendment to § 501.207(3)
confirms this understanding....
...The Florida Senate Judiciary
USCA11 Case: 21-10432 Date Filed: 06/27/2022 Page: 20 of 23
21-10432 ROSENBAUM, J., Dissenting 9
Committee Staff Analysis 3 accompanying the bill that amended
§ 501.207(3) notes that, under Freeman, “if the [predecessor] cor-
poration would not have had a claim against a third party,[] a re-
ceiver could not pursue a cause of action—regardless of whether a
creditor could pursue a claim against the third party—even if such
a suit might benefit the creditors.” Id....
...at n.16.
Thus, the Florida legislature’s awareness of Freeman and its
effects indicates that the Florida legislature added the phrase “in the
name of and on behalf of the defendant enterprise, without regard
to any wrongful acts that were committed by the enterprise” to
§ 501.207(3) to correct the problem it perceived with Freeman’s
statement of Florida corporate law as it pertained to receivers of
alter-ego corporations....
...Staff Analysis, S.B. 202 (Apr.
21, 2006) § VII. Related Issues. But the Staff Analysis simply makes historical
statements of fact about Freeman and its effects, so it is helpful to understand-
ing the context in which the Florida legislature amended § 501.207(3).
USCA11 Case: 21-10432 Date Filed: 06/27/2022 Page: 21 of 23
10 ROSENBAUM, J., Dissenting 21-10432
regardless of whether the defendant corporation had a part in the
wrongdoing.” Id.
III. Given the amendment to § 501.207(3), no impediments ex-
ist to the Receiver’s standing to bring claims against PNC
for aiding and abetting Marcus’s intentional torts.
Of course, my analysis above is only part of the story be-
cause the Florida le...
...sed” from the corpora-
tion’s prior existence. In short, the Florida legislature effectively
revised how it defines a corporation after a receiver takes over a
former alter-ego corporation.
Because the Florida legislature’s amendment to § 501.207(3)
addresses only legal standing, not Article III standing, as long as
Perlman satisfies Article III standing requirements, under
§ 501.207(3), he has standing to proceed against PNC....
...So the Isaiah panel had no basis to find
that Florida endowed the receiver with standing under the facts of
that case. But here, where the Florida legislature has broadened
the rights of a receiver to sue, Isaiah’s holding isn’t binding. Id.
IV
Because the amendment to § 501.207(3)’s text endows the
receiver of a former alter-ego corporation with standing to bring
claims against third parties that have allegedly contributed to the
former alter-ego corporation’s intentional torts, I would vacate the
district court’s dismissal of this case....
CopyPublished | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Argued: Dec 16, 2022
...endant “is willfully using, or has willfully used,
a method, act, or practice declared unlawful under [Fla. Stat. §
501.204], or
who is willfully violating any of the rules of the department adopted under
this part.” Id. §
501.2075....
...ness “who has violated, is violating, or is otherwise likely to vio-
late” the FDUTPA; or (3) a suit on behalf of one or more consum-
ers to recover “actual damages caused by” a violating act or prac-
tice. Id. § 501.207....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14263
...gated in the Act to the Department of Legal Affairs. Petitioners Lavers and Singley seek review of an order of a hearing officer of the Department of Legal Affairs which the Attorney General, head of that Department, modified on review pursuant to §§
501.207 and
501.208, F.S.1973....
...as to order Lavers and Singley to cease and desist, in accordance with §
501.208, and to determine that there is probable cause for the Department to maintain an action on behalf of one or more consumers for their actual damages, as contemplated by §
501.207, F.S.1973....
...Because Lavers and Singley were already restrained by court order from engaging in conduct like that in Murrell the Department’s counsel acknowledged before the hearing officer that a cease and desist order pursuant to §
501.208 would be entirely superfluous. But he pressed for a determination, pursuant to §
501.207, that there is probable cause for the Department to sue Lavers and Singley for damages sustained by various persons whose cars they caused to be towed away....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...We reverse and remand to reinstate the temporary injunction and asset freeze and clarify that Outreach Housing, LLC v. Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs ,
221 So.3d 691 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017), does not require the AG to plead "actual damages" to get injunctive relief under section
501.207(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2018). Background The AG filed a complaint against appellees pursuant to the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA), section
501.207(1)(b), Florida Statutes, seeking injunctive relief, restitution, civil penalties, and other equitable relief....
...temporary injunction, arguing that the AG *3 was required, but failed, to plead "actual damages." The trial court granted the motion and dissolved the temporary injunction, stating that the AG could not bring an action solely for an injunction under section
501.207(1)(b) without pleading "actual damages." The trial court relied solely on the statement, made by this Court in Outreach Housing, LLC ,
221 So.3d at 697 , that "[a]ctual damages are an essential element of a FDUTPA claim." Analysis "A...
...on or clearly improper ruling." E-Racer Tech, LLC v. Office of Attorney Gen., Dep't of Legal Affairs ,
198 So.3d 1107 , 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). We accept the AG's argument that subparagraph (1)(b) of section
501.207 does not require an enforcing authority to plead "actual damages" in an action seeking injunctive and other equitable relief. Section
501.207(1)(b) allows an enforcing authority to bring an action to "enjoin any person who has violated, is violating, or otherwise likely to violate" FDUTPA....
...d for a temporary injunction," but instead need only "demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits."); Millennium Commc'ns & Fulfillment, Inc. v. Office of the Attorney Gen. ,
761 So.2d 1256 , 1260 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) ("[B]ecause section
501.207(1)(b) expressly authorizes the Department to seek injunctive relief on behalf of the state, ......
...that violates FDUTPA. The AG correctly points out that Outreach Housing is distinguishable and inapplicable here. In that case, the AG filed a complaint for violations of FDUTPA seeking to recover the actual damages suffered by consumers pursuant to section 501.207(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2008)....
...2d DCA 1979) (holding that a plaintiff seeking actual damages under FDUTPA must show that a defendant engaged in unfair or deceptive trade practices and that those practices caused injury to the plaintiff). Here, the *4 AG was seeking relief under subparagraph (1)(b), not (1)(c), of section 501.207 ; thus, Outreach Housing is not applicable to the instant case....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...We reverse and remand to reinstate the temporary injunction and asset freeze and clarify that Outreach Housing, LLC v. Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs ,
221 So.3d 691 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017), does not require the AG to plead "actual damages" to get injunctive relief under section
501.207(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2018). Background The AG filed a complaint against appellees pursuant to the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA), section
501.207(1)(b), Florida Statutes, seeking injunctive relief, restitution, civil penalties, and other equitable relief....
...temporary injunction, arguing that the AG *3 was required, but failed, to plead "actual damages." The trial court granted the motion and dissolved the temporary injunction, stating that the AG could not bring an action solely for an injunction under section
501.207(1)(b) without pleading "actual damages." The trial court relied solely on the statement, made by this Court in Outreach Housing, LLC ,
221 So.3d at 697 , that "[a]ctual damages are an essential element of a FDUTPA claim." Analysis "A...
...on or clearly improper ruling." E-Racer Tech, LLC v. Office of Attorney Gen., Dep't of Legal Affairs ,
198 So.3d 1107 , 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). We accept the AG's argument that subparagraph (1)(b) of section
501.207 does not require an enforcing authority to plead "actual damages" in an action seeking injunctive and other equitable relief. Section
501.207(1)(b) allows an enforcing authority to bring an action to "enjoin any person who has violated, is violating, or otherwise likely to violate" FDUTPA....
...d for a temporary injunction," but instead need only "demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits."); Millennium Commc'ns & Fulfillment, Inc. v. Office of the Attorney Gen. ,
761 So.2d 1256 , 1260 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) ("[B]ecause section
501.207(1)(b) expressly authorizes the Department to seek injunctive relief on behalf of the state, ......
...that violates FDUTPA. The AG correctly points out that Outreach Housing is distinguishable and inapplicable here. In that case, the AG filed a complaint for violations of FDUTPA seeking to recover the actual damages suffered by consumers pursuant to section 501.207(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2008)....
...2d DCA 1979) (holding that a plaintiff seeking actual damages under FDUTPA must show that a defendant engaged in unfair or deceptive trade practices and that those practices caused injury to the plaintiff). Here, the *4 AG was seeking relief under subparagraph (1)(b), not (1)(c), of section 501.207 ; thus, Outreach Housing is not applicable to the instant case....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...We reverse and
remand to reinstate the temporary injunction and asset freeze and clarify
that Outreach Housing, LLC v. Office of the Attorney General, Department
of Legal Affairs,
221 So. 3d 691 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017), does not require the
AG to plead “actual damages” to get injunctive relief under section
501.207(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2018).
Background
The AG filed a complaint against appellees pursuant to the Florida
Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA), section
501.207(1)(b),
Florida Statutes, seeking injunctive relief, restitution, civil penalties, and
other equitable relief....
...emporary injunction, arguing
that the AG was required, but failed, to plead “actual damages.” The trial
court granted the motion and dissolved the temporary injunction, stating
that the AG could not bring an action solely for an injunction under section
501.207(1)(b) without pleading “actual damages.” The trial court relied
solely on the statement, made by this Court in Outreach Housing, LLC, 221
So....
...discretion or clearly improper ruling.” E-Racer Tech, LLC v. Office of
Attorney Gen., Dep’t of Legal Affairs,
198 So. 3d 1107, 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA
2016) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
We accept the AG’s argument that subparagraph (1)(b) of section
501.207 does not require an enforcing authority to plead “actual damages”
2
in an action seeking injunctive and other equitable relief. Section
501.207(1)(b) allows an enforcing authority to bring an action to “enjoin
any person who has violated, is violating, or otherwise likely to violate”
FDUTPA....
...a temporary
injunction,” but instead need only “demonstrate a substantial likelihood
of success on the merits.”); Millennium Commc’ns & Fulfillment, Inc. v.
Office of the Attorney Gen.,
761 So. 2d 1256, 1260 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
(“[B]ecause section
501.207(1)(b) expressly authorizes the Department to
seek injunctive relief on behalf of the state, ....
...that violates FDUTPA.
The AG correctly points out that Outreach Housing is distinguishable
and inapplicable here. In that case, the AG filed a complaint for violations
of FDUTPA seeking to recover the actual damages suffered by consumers
pursuant to section 501.207(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2008)....
...2d DCA 1979) (holding that a
plaintiff seeking actual damages under FDUTPA must show that a
defendant engaged in unfair or deceptive trade practices and that those
practices caused injury to the plaintiff). Here, the AG was seeking relief
under subparagraph (1)(b), not (1)(c), of section 501.207; thus, Outreach
Housing is not applicable to the instant case.
3
Conclusion
Because the trial court found that the AG met its burden entitling it to
injunctiv...
