Florida High School Athletic Ass'n v. Rosenberg
117 So. 3d 825
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Student previously played on a non-school water polo club coached by the private school's coach before enrolling at that private school.
- Student enrolled for academic reasons and not at the coach's request; she joined the school swim team after enrollment.
- At the first swim meet the student was ruled ineligible by the school under FHSAA Bylaw 9.2.4 because of her prior participation with the affiliated club team; she missed the entire season.
- The school sought an eligibility ruling from the FHSAA, which upheld ineligibility; the student exhausted administrative remedies.
- Student's father sued in circuit court and obtained a temporary injunction restoring the student’s eligibility; the FHSAA appealed.
- The trial court did not require the movant to post a bond with the temporary injunction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FHSAA is subject to judicial review of its eligibility decision | Father: FHSAA decision reviewable; due process protections apply | FHSAA: claims immunity from judicial review | Court: FHSAA decision is reviewable; injunction properly entered |
| Whether Bylaw 9.2.4 is a recruiting rule applied incorrectly | Father: Bylaw did not apply because student chose school for academics and coach did not recruit her | FHSAA: Bylaw applies to participation in affiliated non-school activities and renders student ineligible | Court: Agreed with trial court that Bylaw 9.2.4 was properly treated as a recruiting-type restriction for purposes of injunction analysis |
| Standard of review for temporary injunction | Father: injunction appropriate given irreparable harm and likelihood of success | FHSAA: trial court erred in law/fact in granting injunction | Court: factual findings reviewed for abuse of discretion; legal conclusions de novo; no error in granting injunction |
| Whether trial court erred by not requiring a bond | Father: bond unnecessary or nominal | FHSAA: injunction defective without bond | Court: Reversed for failure to require bond; remanded to set bond under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.610(b) |
Key Cases Cited
- Foreclosure FreeSearch, Inc. v. Sullivan, 12 So.3d 771 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (standard of review for temporary injunctions — factual findings reviewed for abuse, legal conclusions de novo)
- Burtoff v. Tauber, 85 So.3d 1182 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (elements required for temporary injunction)
- Univ. Med. Clinics, Inc. v. Quality Health Plans, Inc., 51 So.3d 1191 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (temporary injunction standards)
- Fla. High Sch. Activities Ass’n v. Mander ex rel. Mander, 932 So.2d 314 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (injunction defective without bond)
- Bellach v. Huggs of Naples, Inc., 704 So.2d 679 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (trial court cannot waive bond requirement or set nominal amount)
- Forrest v. Citi Residential Lending, Inc., 73 So.3d 269 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (remanding to correct injunction defects, including bond)
- Melbourne Cent. Catholic High Sch. v. Fla. High Sch. Activities Ass'n, 867 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (distinguishable on exhaustion of administrative remedies)