You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Dolphin Project, Inc. v. Ocean World, Inc.

Citations: 610 So. 2d 733; 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 13585; 1992 WL 386564Docket: No. 91-3176

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; December 29, 1992; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The motion for rehearing is granted, and the previous opinion is replaced. The order granting the temporary injunction is affirmed. The appellant argued that the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), 16 U.S.C.A. §§ 1361-1380, necessitates the reversal of the injunction, specifically referencing § 1374, which suggests that access to facilities covered by the act should not be restricted except by an admission fee. However, this argument was not presented to the trial court during the temporary injunction hearing, nor was there supporting testimony. Additionally, it remains unclear whether the MMPA applies to the appellee's facility. The affirmance is without prejudice to the appellant's right to seek to dissolve or modify the injunction. Judges Letts, Gunther, and Warner concur.

Legal Issues Addressed

Consideration of Arguments Not Raised at Trial

Application: The appellant's argument regarding the Marine Mammal Protection Act was not considered because it was not raised during the temporary injunction hearing in the trial court.

Reasoning: This argument was not presented to the trial court during the temporary injunction hearing, nor was there supporting testimony.

Right to Seek Modification of Injunction

Application: The affirmance of the injunction does not prevent the appellant from seeking to dissolve or modify the injunction in the future.

Reasoning: The affirmance is without prejudice to the appellant's right to seek to dissolve or modify the injunction.

Scope of Marine Mammal Protection Act

Application: The applicability of the Marine Mammal Protection Act to the appellee's facility remains undetermined within the context of this case.

Reasoning: Additionally, it remains unclear whether the MMPA applies to the appellee's facility.

Temporary Injunction Affirmation

Application: The court affirmed the order granting the temporary injunction, indicating that the arguments presented were insufficient to warrant a reversal.

Reasoning: The order granting the temporary injunction is affirmed.