696 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 31 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-02-08
A temporary restraining order is appropriate where a trademark owner demonstrates a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of a Lanham Act claim based on evidence of counterfeit goods bearing its registered marks, irreparable injury from loss of sales and erosion of good
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-11-23
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint was frivolous and dismissed it, and further declared the plaintiff a vexatious litigant, enjoining him from filing new actions without prior court approval.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-10-25
The court held that it has the authority under the Federal Debt Collection Procedures Act (FDCPA), incorporating the All Writs Act, to order a judgment debtor to repatriate foreign assets to satisfy a judgment, based on personal jurisdiction over the debtor.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-09-28
YETI Coolers, LLC obtained a temporary restraining order against 60 defendants operating websites that advertised and sold counterfeit YETI-branded products in violation of the Lanham Act. The court found that YETI demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, i
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-09-24
The court held that a pro se plaintiff's complaint was frivolous and dismissed it with prejudice, enjoining him from filing further actions without prior leave due to his vexatious litigation history.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-09-21
The court granted the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from infringing on the plaintiff's trademarks, copyrights, and patent.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-09-21
The court granted plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from manufacturing, selling, or distributing infringing products and from concealing assets.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-08-09
The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss, dismissed the plaintiff's claims with prejudice, and imposed a prefiling injunction against the plaintiff.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-06-17
The court granted plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from using the plaintiff's trademarks on counterfeit goods and restraining their assets.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-05-21
The court held that the plaintiff's repeated lawsuits, identical to previously adjudicated cases, are barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and res judicata, and therefore granted motions to dismiss and enjoined the plaintiff from filing further actions without leave of court.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-04-19
The court granted the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, restraining defendants from selling infringing products and ordering financial institutions to freeze assets associated with the infringement.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-03-12
The court held that it would not enjoin state court proceedings because the issue of whether the state court class definition includes parties whose claims were released in a prior federal settlement was not clear beyond peradventure, and Blue Cross had an adequate remedy at law
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-02-12
The court granted Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, restraining Defendants from selling infringing goods and ordering the restraint of their financial accounts.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-22
The district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review claims challenging an alien's removal order or the proceedings leading to it, as these are exclusively vested in the courts of appeals under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
-
An appellate court's final judgment vacating a death sentence cannot be reinstated after the mandate has issued and the 120-day recall period has expired, even if an intervening decision changes the underlying constitutional law. The trial court must proceed with resentencing as
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-11-06
The court held that the petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed as successive and frivolous because the petitioner has previously filed numerous habeas petitions and the current claims are not new and lack merit.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-09-25
The court granted plaintiffs' ex parte application for a temporary restraining order due to their strong likelihood of success on the merits and the irreparable harm they would suffer from defendants' alleged trademark infringement.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-04-23
The court granted a preliminary injunction against defendants for trademark counterfeiting and infringement, finding a strong likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-04-20
The court held that the plaintiff is a vexatious litigant and enjoined him from filing any new documents in the Middle District of Florida without prior written approval.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-03-16
The court held that an injunction under the All Writs Act is not warranted to prohibit defendants from filing future state court proceedings because it is not necessary to safeguard the court's jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-02-03
The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus directing state courts in their duties, and that challenges to state post-conviction proceedings do not state a basis for habeas relief.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-01-27
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus compelling state officials to release the plaintiff and others from civil commitment.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-12-19
The court deferred ruling on an injunction against a non-party prosecuting claims released in a prior settlement, pending the non-party's response, and denied a motion for an order to show cause.
-
The court held that the petitioner's repeated frivolous filings constitute an abuse of judicial resources, warranting sanctions.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-10-07
The court granted Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining Defendants from manufacturing, selling, or distributing counterfeit goods bearing Plaintiff's trademarks and from transferring assets.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2019-09-24
The court granted the plaintiff's application for a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable injury, a favorable balance of harms, and that the injunction serves the public interest.
-
The Florida Supreme Court has inherent constitutional authority to issue post-warrant scheduling orders that set deadlines for trial court proceedings and prohibit new filings without the Court's leave, even after a mandate issues from an appeal. This authority derives from the C
-
M.D. Fla.·
2014-10-03
The court denied Marlow Marine Sales' motion for a preliminary injunction to stop arbitration proceedings in London, finding it unlikely to prevail on the merits and unlikely to suffer irreparable harm.
-
The court reversed the trial court's denial of a habeas corpus petition and remanded for the trial court to order the Department of Corrections to show cause regarding whether the appellant was properly awarded all applicable jail, prison, and gain-time credits under Florida law.
-
1990 WL 168164·
M.D. Fla.·
2013-03-28
The court held that a district court of incarceration lacks the jurisdictional authority to order another coequal district court to resentence a defendant.
-
745 F. Supp. 2d 1214·
M.D. Fla.·
2010-09-27
The court held that the defendant's claims were not cognizable in a writ of error coram nobis proceeding because they did not allege fundamental errors and were either previously litigated, could have been raised on direct appeal, or constituted newly discovered evidence or trial
-
10 So. 3d 705·
Fla. 5th DCA·
2009-05-29
The court held that the petitioner's All Writs petition was frivolous and an abuse of process, prohibiting him from filing further pro se pleadings concerning his criminal case.
-
6 So. 3d 695·
Fla. 4th DCA·
2009-03-18
-
547 F. Supp. 2d 1262·
S.D. Fla.·
2008-01-03
The court held that a permanent injunction is not an available remedy under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69 to aid in the collection of a money judgment, as it is not contemplated by the rule or applicable state statutes, and equitable relief requires the absence of an adequat
-
Florida Supreme Court denied death row inmate's petition for stay of execution and request to compel disclosure of lethal injection procedures, finding no Eighth Amendment violation based on prior precedent.
-
243 F. Supp. 2d 1293·
N.D. Fla.·
2002-12-10
A claim filed within a state court delinquency proceeding, even if it would be removable if filed as a separate action, is not removable under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) unless the entire proceeding is removable or the claim arises under federal law as per the amended 28 U.S.C. § 1441(c
-
165 F. Supp. 2d 1303·
N.D. Fla.·
2001-08-07
Plaintiffs filed a class-action lawsuit in state court against Conoco, Agrico, and Escambia Treating, alleging trespass, private nuisance, and strict liability arising from environmental contamination at industrial facilities in Pensacola, Florida. Defendants removed the case to
-
Richardson seeks post-conviction relief based on a claimed change in law regarding burglary of curtilage announced in State v. Hamilton. The court denies his motion as untimely and holds that the change in law is not retroactively applicable to final convictions.
-
999 F.2d 1302·
8th Cir.·
1993-08-05
The court held that it had jurisdiction to review the district court's order compelling the preparation of a Vaughn index via a writ of mandamus because the government challenged the district court's authority, not merely its discretion.
-
996 F.2d 962·
8th Cir.·
1993-06-29
-
993 F.2d 4·
1st Cir.·
1993-05-21
The court held that the appellant's plea was voluntary and the district court's failure to inquire further into his health did not constitute an error of fundamental character warranting a writ of coram nobis.
-
994 F.2d 1027·
3d Cir.·
1993-05-13
The District Court erred in its jurisdictional analysis but correctly dismissed the petitions on other grounds; however, its sua sponte order enjoining the plaintiff from filing further actions was an abuse of discretion and is vacated.
-
988 F.2d 498·
4th Cir.·
1993-03-08
The court held that the appeal regarding the automatic stay's applicability was moot due to foreclosure, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in enjoining further proceedings in New York.
-
981 F.2d 543·
D.C. Cir.·
1992-12-29
Transfer orders under 28 U.S.C. § 1631 are not appealable, and a writ of mandamus is not warranted as the district court did not abuse its authority in transferring the case.
-
980 F.2d 747·
D.C. Cir.·
1992-12-11
A federal district court's denial of a motion to remand is not subject to interlocutory review by a court of appeals.
-
973 F.2d 1133·
4th Cir.·
1992-08-14
The court held that the Tribe failed to establish that the district court's refusal to certify a defendant class constituted an abuse of discretion warranting mandamus.
-
970 F.2d 626·
9th Cir.·
1992-07-16
The court held that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying Guerrero's application to correct his military records, and that the district court erred in affirming the Board's decision.
-
968 F.2d 1506·
2d Cir.·
1992-06-30
The Election Officer exceeded his authority under the All Writs Act by attempting to impose reporting and disclosure requirements on non-party independent committees that were not provided for in the Consent Decree or Election Rules.
-
959 F.2d 960·
Fed. Cir.·
1992-03-26
The Court of Appeals held that the Court of International Trade had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) to hear St. Paul's claims, as they arose from government non-disclosure and accrued after the administrative protest period had expired. The court reversed the denial of St.
-
987 F.2d 334·
6th Cir.·
1992-03-02
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declaring a mistrial due to manifest necessity, thus double jeopardy does not bar retrial, and mandamus is not appropriate for reviewing the jury selection transfer or the consideration of the FBI affidavit.