Adequate Remedy At Law

1,012 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Seaescape, Ltd., Inc. v. Maximum Mktg. Exposure, Inc.
  568 So. 2d 952· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-09-21 ·cited 31×
  SeaEscape appealed a trial court's ex parte temporary injunction requiring it to continue employment contracts with Panebianco and Maximum Marketing. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that personal service contracts are not enforceable by injunction and that Se
• Orkin Exterminating Co. OF S. Fla., Inc. v. Truly Nolen, Inc.
  117 So. 2d 419· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-01-25 ·cited 31×
  Orkin Exterminating Company appealed a chancery decree awarding Truly Nolen, Inc. compensatory and punitive damages for tortious interference with employment contracts. The Florida appellate court reversed the punitive damages award, holding that equity courts lack authority to a
• Adventist Health System/Sunbelt, Inc. v. Hegwood
  569 So. 2d 1295· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-10-11 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the medical malpractice statutes do not eliminate the common law remedy of a pure bill of discovery, allowing it when statutory discovery is inadequate.
• A.J. Canfield Co. v. Vess Beverages, Inc.
  796 F.2d 903· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-15 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the granting of a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiff had a better than negligible chance of establishing trademark rights in 'CHOCOLATE FUDGE' for diet soda and that the balance of harms and public interest favored the injunction.
• Lynk v. LaPORTE Superior Court NO. 2
  789 F.2d 554· 7th Cir.· 1986-04-24 ·cited 30×
  The district court erred in dismissing the federal civil rights suit under the Younger doctrine because there were no pending state court proceedings in which the plaintiff could vindicate his rights.
• Shaffer v. Globe Prot., Inc.
  721 F.2d 1121· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the denial of a preliminary injunction was not an abuse of discretion, and an appeal of that denial does not bring up for review prior interlocutory orders dismissing a conspiracy claim and denying class certification.
• dos Santos v. Columbus-Cuneo-Cabrini Med. Ctr.
  684 F.2d 1346· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-10 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate irreparable injury, a favorable balance of hardships, or a lack of adverse impact on the public interest.
• City OF Coral Springs v. Fla. Nat'l Props., Inc.
  340 So. 2d 1271· Fla. 4th DCA· 1976-12-24 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the amended complaint failed to state a cause of action for injunctive relief because it did not sufficiently allege irreparable harm.
• Winfield Assocs., Inc. v. Stonecipher
  429 F.2d 1087· 10th Cir.· 1970-07-14 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the denial of equitable relief from a default judgment, finding the appellant's situation resulted from inexcusable neglect and failure to pursue available legal remedies like appeal.
• Fort v. Anne Burton Fort
  104 So. 2d 69· Fla. 1st DCA· 1958-06-17 ·cited 30×
  In this procedural decision, the Florida District Court of Appeal dismissed a petition for writ of certiorari brought by a divorced husband seeking to reduce alimony payments. The court held that newly adopted Florida appellate rules superseded the prior certiorari statute and pr
• Wolf v. Indus. Supply Corp.
  62 So. 2d 30· Fla.· 1952-12-16 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari to review an interlocutory order in a common law action, holding that such review is only granted in exceptional cases where there's a clear departure from the essential requirements of law and no adequate remed
• Vrasic v. Lome Leibel
  106 So. 3d 485· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-01-09 ·cited 29×
  Michelle Vrasic appealed a temporary injunction granted to Lome Leibel that prohibited her from using his name in commercial contexts and publishing her book containing references to him. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the 'no contact' provision but reversed the spe
• Weaver v. Fla. Power & Light Co.
  172 F.3d 771· 11th Cir.· 1999-04-13 ·cited 29×
  Mary Weaver, a terminated employee, pursued discrimination claims in federal court while simultaneously pursuing contractual claims through arbitration under a collective bargaining agreement. The district court enjoined the arbitration based on res judicata and waiver defenses,
• Cnty. of Escambia v. The Blount Constr. Co.
  66 Fla. 129· Fla.· 1913-07-02 ·cited 29×
  The court affirmed the lower court's decision to overrule demurrers in a case involving a construction contract. The dispute centered on whether the county was obligated to pay for alterations and additions to a jail building, and whether bids were required for these changes.
• Bland v. Freightliner LLC
  206 F. Supp. 2d 1202· M.D. Fla.· 2002-04-15 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the plaintiffs sufficiently stated claims for rescission, revocation of acceptance, and breach of express warranty, and that venue was proper in federal court after removal.
• Korn v. Ambassador Homes, Inc.
  546 So. 2d 756· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-07-11 ·cited 28×
  Court affirmed temporary injunction freezing assets pending arbitration of constructive trust claim, holding that injunction is proper to preserve the res when dissipation is probable and success on the merits is reasonably likely.
• Scruggs v. Moellering
  870 F.2d 376· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-01 ·cited 28×
  A federal civil rights suit ancillary to a post-conviction proceeding, seeking an injunction to obtain an accurate transcript, requires exhaustion of state remedies and is an improper collateral attack on a conviction.
• In re Worksite Inspection OF Quality Prods., Inc.
  592 F.2d 611· 1st Cir.· 1979-02-16 ·cited 28×
  The district court should have dismissed Quality's motion to suppress for want of equity, as Quality had an adequate remedy within the OSHA administrative and judicial review process.
• Wellman Indus., Inc. v. The Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  490 F.2d 427· 4th Cir.· 1974-01-22 ·cited 28×
  The court held that affidavits obtained by the NLRB investigator during an inquiry into objections to a representation election are protected from disclosure under FOIA's exemption 7 for investigatory files compiled for law enforcement purposes.
• BAY N Gulf, Inc. v. Anchor Seafood, Inc.
  971 So. 2d 842· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-10-24 ·cited 27×
  Bay N Gulf appealed the trial court's dissolution of a temporary injunction preventing Anchor Seafood from conveying frozen seafood. The court affirmed, holding that a trial court has continuing discretion to dissolve a temporary injunction and that the trial court did not abuse
• Baldwin Metals Co., Inc. v. Donovan
  642 F.2d 768· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-13 ·cited 27×
  Federal district courts should not exercise jurisdiction to invalidate OSHA search warrants or suppress evidence before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) has rendered a final administrative decision, as parties must exhaust administrative remedies and e
• McNORTON v. PAN Am. Bank OF Orlando, N.A.
  387 So. 2d 393· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-07-23 ·cited 27×
  McNorton appeals from a circuit court order striking his complaint seeking relief from forfeiture of a $50,000 deposit paid toward a mortgage purchase agreement with Pan American Bank. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reverses, holding that McNorton stated a valid cause of acti
• Atl. Richfield Co. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  546 F.2d 646· 5th Cir.· 1977-02-04 ·cited 27×
  The court held that Atlantic Richfield Company had an adequate remedy at law and would suffer no undue hardship by being remitted to FTC enforcement proceedings, thus precluding pre-enforcement judicial review of the investigatory subpoenas.
• FOX v. City OF W. Palm Beach
  383 F.2d 189· 5th Cir.· 1967-09-26 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court's order denying mandatory injunctive relief was appealable as a final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and that the denial of leave to amend the complaint was not an abuse of discretion.
• Harvey Corp. v. Universal Equip. Co.
  158 Fla. 644· Fla.· 1947-03-28 ·cited 27×
  Harvey Corporation leased a seasonal hotel from Bertsol, Inc., which was requisitioned by the Army during World War II. When the Army returned the property to the new owner, Universal Equipment Co., the owner refused to return it to the lessee. The Florida Supreme Court reverses
• Logan v. Geo. A. Logan
  22 Fla. 561· Fla.· 1886-06-01 ·cited 27×
  William H. Logan, a judgment creditor, sought equity relief to void a mortgage executed by his debtor George A. Logan on the ground that it was procured by fraud and was inherently fraudulent as to creditors because it permitted the mortgagor to freely dispose of mortgaged mercha
• Concerned Citizens FOR Jud. Fairness, Inc. v. Yacucci
  162 So. 3d 68· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-09-03 ·cited 26×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a temporary injunction prohibiting an electioneering organization from publishing information about a judicial candidate during a political campaign, holding that the injunction constituted an unconstitutional prior restraint on First Amendment
• Univ. Med. Clinics, Inc. v. Quality Health Plans, Inc.
  51 So. 3d 1191· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-01-05 ·cited 26×
  University Medical Clinics and its president Dr. Sadow appealed a trial court's grant of temporary injunctive relief to Quality Health Plans, a Medicare HMO, preventing them from soliciting QHP members to disenroll and requiring production of medical records. The appellate court
• Vargas v. Vargas
  771 So. 2d 594· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-11-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the temporary injunction, but the bond amount was inadequate.
• Friends FOR ALL Child., Inc. v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp.
  746 F.2d 816· D.C. Cir.· 1984-10-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that District of Columbia tort law recognizes a cause of action for the cost of diagnostic examinations necessitated by a defendant's negligence, even in the absence of proven physical injury, and that a mandatory preliminary injunction requiring the defendant to f
• Fla. Land Co. v. Orange Cnty.
  418 So. 2d 370· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-08-18 ·cited 26×
  Florida Land Company appealed the denial of its motion for a temporary injunction to halt Orange County's Ordinance 81-14, which allocated sewage treatment capacity. The court affirmed the denial, holding that the appellant failed to demonstrate that the injunction would serve th
• The MacHlett Labs., Inc. v. Techny Indus., Inc.
  665 F.2d 795· 7th Cir.· 1981-12-08 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and an inadequate remedy at law, and the balance of hardships and public interest did not favor the injunction.
• In re the Inspection of Cent. Mine Equip. Co. Ray Marshall v. Cent. Mine Equip. Co.
  608 F.2d 719· 8th Cir.· 1979-11-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that an employer cannot separately litigate the validity of an OSHA search warrant in district court when adequate remedies exist within the OSHA enforcement and appellate process.
• Ekanem v. The Health & Hosp. Corp. OF Marion Cnty.
  589 F.2d 316· 7th Cir.· 1978-12-21 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable injury.
• A. L. K. Corp. v. Columbia Pictures Indus., Inc.
  440 F.2d 761· 3d Cir.· 1971-04-07 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate irreparable injury, a prerequisite for a preliminary injunction, because potential lost income from a unique film could be adequately remedied by monetary damages.
• Argosy Ltd. v. Hennigan
  404 F.2d 14· 5th Cir.· 1968-11-05 ·cited 26×
  The district court correctly dismissed the action for want of subject-matter jurisdiction, as the determination of whether an article is an import falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Customs Court.
• AMF Tuboscope, Inc. v. Cunningham
  352 F.2d 150· 10th Cir.· 1965-10-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that plaintiffs were entitled to a jury trial on the issues of patent validity, infringement, and damages, and that the trial court abused its discretion in denying this right.
• E. States Petroleum Corp. v. Rogers
  280 F.2d 611· D.C. Cir.· 1960-05-12 ·cited 26×
  The District Court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, as the Customs Court has exclusive jurisdiction over import tax disputes, and a single judge can dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
• Johnson v. Riverland Levee Dist.
  117 F.2d 711· 8th Cir.· 1941-02-14 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the federal court lacked jurisdiction due to destroyed diversity of citizenship and the existence of an adequate remedy at law under Missouri statutes, precluding equitable relief.
• Greater Miami Dev. Corp. v. Pender
  142 Fla. 390· Fla.· 1940-01-23 ·cited 26×
  This case clarifies the scope of the writ of certiorari in Florida, particularly its use for reviewing interlocutory orders. The court held that while common law certiorari is limited, Rule 34 of the court's rules allows it to serve as a substitute for appeals of interlocutory or
• Knight v. The City of Miami
  127 Fla. 585· Fla.· 1937-03-29 ·cited 26×
  Property owners sought equitable relief to enjoin the City of Miami from summarily destroying their rental dwelling houses without notice or hearing. The Florida Supreme Court held that the bill stated a valid claim for equitable jurisdiction because the owners lacked an adequate
• State v. Chillingworth
  122 Fla. 339· Fla.· 1936-01-07 ·cited 26×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a 1935 state statute requiring bondholders suing municipalities to disclose the names and addresses of all beneficial owners before proceeding was unconstitutional because it impaired the obligation of contracts and represented an unwarranted l
• Mary Dee's, Inc. v. Tartamella
  492 So. 2d 815· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-08-13 ·cited 25×
  In this appeal from a non-final order, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's denial of a motion to dissolve a temporary injunction, holding that plaintiffs seeking to collect on a promissory note had an adequate remedy at law through money judgment and pr
• Salem INN, Inc. v. Frank
  501 F.2d 18· 2d Cir.· 1974-06-25 ·cited 25×
  The court held that federal courts should not intervene in pending state criminal prosecutions absent a showing of bad faith, harassment, or other special circumstances, even if the federal suit was filed first.
• Tucker v. Prevatt Builders, Inc.
  116 So. 2d 437· Fla. 1st DCA· 1959-12-15 ·cited 25×
  A contractor sought to establish an equitable lien against real property to secure payment for construction work performed on a subdivision. The trial court dismissed the complaint, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the complaint adequately stated a cause of action f
• McNabb v. Tampa & St. Petersburg Land Co.
  78 Fla. 149· Fla.· 1919-07-22 ·cited 25×
  A corporation sued its promoters for secret profits obtained during its formation. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's overruling of the promoters' demurrer, holding that a corporation may maintain an equity suit against its promoters for breach of fiduciary duty
• Sundance Land Corp. v. Cmty. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n
  840 F.2d 653· 9th Cir.· 1988-02-23 ·cited 24×
  Sundance has standing to seek injunctive relief under HOLA because its injury is a foreseeable consequence of the alleged illegal loan, but it lacks standing to seek damages due to the indirect nature of its injury.
• S. Fla. Limousines, Inc. v. Broward Cnty. Aviation Dep't
  512 So. 2d 1059· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-09-09 ·cited 24×
  The denial of a temporary injunction is affirmed because the appellant failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or an abuse of discretion by the trial court.
• Sanchez v. Abner Solomon
  508 So. 2d 1264· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-05-26 ·cited 24×
  The appellate court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to dissolve or modify the injunction freezing the disputed bank accounts.
• Acquafredda v. Messina
  408 So. 2d 828· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-01-20 ·cited 24×
  Appellants challenge a temporary restraining order that prevented them from disposing of business assets during a lawsuit on a promissory note. The court reversed, holding that an injunction cannot issue in an action at law for debt when adequate legal remedies such as attachment