Action For Injunction

216 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• McCARTY v. Amoco Pipeline Co.
  595 F.2d 389· 7th Cir.· 1979-04-02 ·cited 8×
  In a removed diversity case seeking injunctive relief, the amount in controversy can be measured by the value to either party, not exclusively the plaintiff's viewpoint, to determine federal jurisdiction.
• Local 13, Int'l Fed'n OF Prof'l & Tech. Eng'rs, AFL-CIO v. Gen. Elec. Co.
  531 F.2d 1178· 3d Cir.· 1976-02-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the collective bargaining agreement explicitly excluded disputes over the assignment of work from arbitration, notwithstanding other provisions that might be implicated.
• YU Fung Cheng and Hi Pan Chan v. Rinaldi
  493 F.2d 1229· 3d Cir.· 1974-03-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the United Nations Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees requires refugees seeking asylum to be lawfully present in the country.
• City OF Birmingham v. Monk
  185 F.2d 859· 5th Cir.· 1950-12-19 ·cited 8×
  Zoning laws that restrict residential occupancy based solely on race violate the Fourteenth Amendment, and such restrictions cannot be justified as a valid exercise of police power.
• Himonas v. Denver & R. G. W. R. Co.
  179 F.2d 171· 10th Cir.· 1949-12-23 ·cited 8×
  A prescriptive easement for an irrigation ditch across a railroad's right of way, granted under the Act of March 3, 1875, can be acquired if the use is public and does not interfere with the railroad's operations.
• Eisenberg v. Corning
  179 F.2d 275· D.C. Cir.· 1949-12-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that tuition credited by taxes paid by a nonresident pupil's parent constitutes 'free instruction' prohibited by a later appropriation act, superseding prior conflicting legislation.
• Woods v. Durr
  170 F.2d 976· 3d Cir.· 1948-11-08 ·cited 8×
  A landlord may evict a tenant to permanently withdraw housing accommodations from the rental market in good faith, even if the withdrawal is for the purpose of sale, under Section 209(a)(5) of the Housing and Rent Act of 1947, as amended.
• United States v. Yakima Tribal Court of the Yakima Indian Nation & David Ward
  794 F.2d 1402· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-21 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the tribal court's order was void due to the United States' sovereign immunity and that the district court had jurisdiction to enjoin its enforcement.
• The Nat'l Nutritional Foods Ass'n & Protein Prods. Ass'n v. Califano
  603 F.2d 327· 2d Cir.· 1979-06-27 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the FDA's rulemaking process, proceeding under § 403(a) rather than § 403(j), was not so plainly beyond its powers as to warrant pre-enforcement judicial intervention, and that the meeting of the ad hoc advisory group violated the Federal Advisory Committee Ac
• Sons v. Mitchell
  457 F.2d 745· 9th Cir.· 1972-03-17 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the labor dispute provision of 8 C.F.R. § 211.1(b)(1) is invalid because it is not rationally related to the administration of the Immigration and Naturalization Act.
• Rivera-Puig v. Hon. Gabriel Garcia-Rosario
  983 F.2d 311· 1st Cir.· 1992-12-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the closure provision of Rule 23(c) of the Puerto Rico Rules of Criminal Procedure is unconstitutional as it violates the First Amendment right of access to preliminary hearings, and that abstention doctrines do not apply.
• State of Fla. Dep't of Env't Reg. v. Marieta Kaszyk
  590 So. 2d 1010· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-12-10 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation appealed the denial of a temporary injunction against a trailer park owner whose sewage treatment plants violated state effluent standards. The appellate court reversed, holding that DER established all elements for a temporary i
• Stiller v. Mariner CAY Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc.
  513 So. 2d 798· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-10-14 ·cited 6×
• Shiny Rock Mining Corp. v. United States
  825 F.2d 216· 9th Cir.· 1987-08-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the notation rule was properly applied to void the mining claim, the district court erred by not addressing the underlying validity of the Public Land Order that created the withdrawal.
• United States v. Snider
  779 F.2d 1151· 6th Cir.· 1985-12-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government was not required to file its claim for past Medicare overpayments as a compulsory counterclaim in the prior injunction action, and that collateral estoppel applied to preclude relitigation of the issue of whether the services provided constitute
• Humphreys v. Donovan
  755 F.2d 1211· 6th Cir.· 1985-02-20 ·cited 6×
  Attorneys acting as 'persuaders' under the LMRDA are required to file disclosure reports, and these requirements do not unconstitutionally infringe on their First Amendment rights or violate the attorney-client privilege.
• Liptak v. The United States
  748 F.2d 1254· 8th Cir.· 1984-11-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by improperly referring the case to a special master without exceptional circumstances or consent, and that a transcript was necessary to review credibility findings.
• Story v. Marsh
  732 F.2d 1375· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Army Corps of Engineers' decision to artificially crevasse the frontline levee is an action committed to agency discretion and therefore unreviewable, and that the district court erred in granting an injunction and in its rulings on condemnation cases.
• Commonwealth OF Va. v. Tenneco, Inc.
  538 F.2d 1026· 4th Cir.· 1976-02-20 ·cited 6×
• Prof'l Eng'rs, Inc. v. United States
  527 F.2d 597· 4th Cir.· 1975-10-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Statute bars suits to restrain tax collection, and the taxpayer's claims did not meet the exceptions for such injunctions.
• Aguilar v. United States
  501 F.2d 127· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a taxpayer subject to a quick termination of their tax period under § 6851 is entitled to an injunction against assessment and collection if the IRS fails to issue a deficiency notice, and may also prove the assessment was arbitrary and capricious.
• Reid v. Reid
  269 F.2d 923· 10th Cir.· 1959-08-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in determining that Don R. Reid was not an indispensable party and that the injunctive relief granted was proper and not impossible to perform.
• Smith v. Flinn
  261 F.2d 781· 8th Cir.· 1958-12-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the IRS's sale of seized property without complying with statutory exceptions, particularly 26 U.S.C.A. § 6863(b)(3), constituted extraordinary circumstances justifying injunctive relief despite the general prohibition against suits to restrain tax collection.
• Welcome Wagon, Inc. v. Morris
  224 F.2d 693· 4th Cir.· 1955-07-26 ·cited 6×
  The appellate court held that the restrictive covenant was void and unenforceable because it was unreasonable in duration and geographic scope, and thus affirmed the district court's denial of injunctive relief.
• Valley View Vill., Inc. v. Proffett
  221 F.2d 412· 6th Cir.· 1955-04-23 ·cited 6×
  A municipality may validly adopt a zoning ordinance that places its entire area into a single use district, provided it is not arbitrary or unreasonable in its application.
• Spector Motor Serv., Inc. v. O'Connor
  181 F.2d 150· 2d Cir.· 1950-03-29 ·cited 6×
• Csatari v. Gen. Fin. Corp.
  173 F.2d 798· 6th Cir.· 1949-04-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the federal district court did not err in refusing to exercise ancillary jurisdiction to enjoin the enforcement of state court judgments, as the state courts provided adequate remedies and had already ruled on the dischargeability issue.
• ST. Lo Const. Co., Inc. v. Koenigsberger
  174 F.2d 25· D.C. Cir.· 1949-02-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the lower court erred in granting an injunction without considering the equitable factors and substantial changes in the neighborhood that might render the restrictive covenant unenforceable.
• Superior Packing Co. v. Porter
  156 F.2d 193· 8th Cir.· 1946-07-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the carload discount provisions of the price regulations applied to defendant's practice of shipping in carload quantities to a single destination, even if sold to multiple buyers.
• Mech. Farm Equip. Distribs., Inc. v. Porter
  156 F.2d 296· 9th Cir.· 1946-06-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that sales of used crawler tractors to farmers were covered by M.P.R. No. 136, and the appellant's sales did not meet the criteria for higher pricing as rebuilt and guaranteed machines. The issuance of an injunction was also proper.
• Michael del Balso, Inc. v. Carozza
  136 F.2d 280· D.C. Cir.· 1943-06-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in awarding damages on a quantum meruit basis when the defendant breached the contract by wrongfully terminating the plaintiff's employment.
• Fla. Indus. Comm'n & S. L. Wilson v. Gary-Lockhart Drug Co., Inc.
  143 Fla. 293· Fla.· 1940-06-07 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court order that the Florida Industrial Commission lacked authority under the 1937 unemployment compensation statute to assess four related drug store corporations as a single employment unit, but had such authority under the 1939 amendm
• Benner v. Kendall
  21 Fla. 584· Fla.· 1885-06-01 ·cited 6×
  This case involves a dispute over land ownership where the complainants sought an injunction to prevent a foreclosure sale they believed would cloud their title. The court dissolved the injunction and dismissed the bill, finding the complainants failed to establish a valid title
• Jonnie Davis v. Bill Williams AIR Conditioning & Heating, Inc.
  765 So. 2d 114· Fla. 1st DCA· 2000-06-06 ·cited 4×
  Appellant Davis challenges the trial court's denial of attorney's fees under Florida Statute § 57.105 after she was voluntarily dismissed from a lawsuit filed by her husband's employer based on allegations of embezzlement. The court reversed, holding that filing a lawsuit without
• Mid-America Pipeline Co. v. Lario Enters., Inc.
  942 F.2d 1519· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the asphalt racetracks and increased overburden materially interfere with MAPCO's easement rights, and that damages are an inadequate remedy, thus reversing the denial of a mandatory injunction.
• Consol. Edison Co. OF NEW York, Inc. v. Breznay
  873 F.2d 301· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1989-03-14 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the action, upholding the denial of the appellant utilities' request to participate in the administrative proceedings. The court found that the request was untimely and that the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) ac
• Nysa-Ila Vacation & Holiday Fund & Nysa-Ila GAI Fund v. The Waterfront Comm'n OF NEW York Harbor
  732 F.2d 292· 2d Cir.· 1984-04-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Waterfront Commission Compact, including its assessment provision, is federal law due to congressional consent, and therefore is not preempted by ERISA.
• Anderson v. Bell
  411 So. 2d 948· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-03-25 ·cited 4×
  Owners of land including a portion of an artificial lake's bed have the right to reasonable, lawful use of the entire lake, not exclusive rights.
• Daley v. Mathews
  536 F.2d 519· 2d Cir.· 1976-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the physician's action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the FDA was not ripe for adjudication because the FDA had not taken sufficient affirmative action to create a concrete controversy.
• Shel-Al Corp. v. Am. Nat'l Ins. Co. & Exch. Sec. Bank
  492 F.2d 87· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a mineral reservation and damage release clause in a deed rendered title unmerchantable, and that a stand-by deposit fee was valid liquidated damages.
• Warren v. Lopatin
  475 F.2d 1329· D.C. Cir.· 1973-03-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the record was insufficient to determine if the appellee was a holder in due course, requiring a remand for further factual development.
• Sanders v. McCLELLAN
  463 F.2d 894· D.C. Cir.· 1972-04-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the issue of a subpoena's impact on First Amendment rights is justiciable, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a sufficient threat of irreparable harm to warrant injunctive or declaratory relief before exhausting administrative remedies.
• Scales v. Ardelle E. Scales and Leslie Byron George
  297 F.2d 219· 5th Cir.· 1961-12-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the survivor of a joint and mutual will took a defeasible fee simple title with unlimited power to convey and expend the estate, and that prior gifts to a remainderman were not chargeable against his share.
• Austin v. The Mun. Court for the Dist. OF Columbia
  235 F.2d 836· D.C. Cir.· 1956-06-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Municipal Court's Rule 75, requiring attorneys to enroll and pay a nominal fee to practice before it, is a valid procedural rule for efficient administration of justice.
• Callow v. Lehmann
  233 F.2d 859· 6th Cir.· 1956-05-28 ·cited 4×
• Hart v. United States
  207 F.2d 813· 8th Cir.· 1953-11-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the United States could establish its tax lien priority in federal court, it could not enjoin the state court from administering property already in its custody.
• Woods v. Forest Hills S., Inc.
  172 F.2d 147· 2d Cir.· 1949-01-11 ·cited 4×
  Garage services provided to tenants, even if not explicitly in leases, are considered services connected with housing accommodations under rent control regulations.
• Fleming v. Richter
  159 F.2d 792· 2d Cir.· 1947-02-10 ·cited 4×
  A violation of the price line control established by Revised Maximum Price Regulation No. 287 constitutes a violation of a maximum price, entitling the Administrator to seek statutory damages.
• Duke v. White
  616 F.2d 955· 6th Cir.· 1980-03-05 ·cited 3×
• Ward v. Resolution Tr. Corp.
  996 F.2d 99· 5th Cir.· 1993-07-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the RTC's sale of assets is a statutory power that cannot be enjoined or rescinded, even if alleged to be improperly exercised, due to FIRREA's anti-injunction provision.