Narrative Opinion Summary
The court found that the evidence clearly demonstrated that Simplex, Inc. received the necessary consideration for the stock issuance in question, contradicting the previous finding. As a result, plaintiff appellant Faro is entitled to a writ of mandamus confirming his ownership of 460,000 shares in Music Tones, Ltd., following Simplex’s merger. Relevant statutes cited include Fla. Stat. 607.0621(3, 4) and 678.4011, as well as case precedents such as Soreno Hotel Co. v. State and Hern v. Looney. The prior order denying the mandamus is reversed, and directions are given to issue the writ. Additionally, the appeal regarding a preliminary mandatory injunction is deemed moot. The case is reversed and remanded with instructions.
Legal Issues Addressed
Case Reversal and Remand with Instructionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The case is reversed and remanded with specific instructions for further proceedings in line with the court's findings.
Reasoning: The case is reversed and remanded with instructions.
Consideration for Stock Issuance under Florida Statutessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that Simplex, Inc. received the necessary consideration for the stock issuance, thereby entitling the plaintiff to ownership of shares.
Reasoning: The court found that the evidence clearly demonstrated that Simplex, Inc. received the necessary consideration for the stock issuance in question, contradicting the previous finding.
Entitlement to Writ of Mandamussubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The plaintiff appellant Faro is entitled to a writ of mandamus confirming his ownership of shares due to the merger of Simplex with Music Tones, Ltd.
Reasoning: As a result, plaintiff appellant Faro is entitled to a writ of mandamus confirming his ownership of 460,000 shares in Music Tones, Ltd., following Simplex’s merger.
Mootness of Preliminary Injunction Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appeal regarding the preliminary mandatory injunction was declared moot, thus not requiring further consideration.
Reasoning: Additionally, the appeal regarding a preliminary mandatory injunction is deemed moot.
Reversal of Prior Denial of Mandamussubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reversed the prior order that denied the writ of mandamus and directed that the writ be issued.
Reasoning: The prior order denying the mandamus is reversed, and directions are given to issue the writ.