Equitable Discretion

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

• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Tex. Gulf Sulphur Co.
  401 F.2d 833· 2d Cir.· 1968-08-13 ·cited 505×
• Chris-Craft Indus., Inc. v. Piper Aircraft Corp.
  480 F.2d 341· 2d Cir.· 1973-03-16 ·cited 154×
  The court granted a petition for rehearing for specific appellees to allow the district court to determine individual liability based on the main opinion's principles.
• Ky. Fried Chicken Corp. v. Diversified Packaging Corp.
  549 F.2d 368· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-25 ·cited 146×
  The court held that Kentucky Fried Chicken's approved-source requirement for franchisee supplies did not constitute an illegal tying arrangement under the Sherman Act, nor did it violate the rule of reason, and affirmed the lower court's decision.
• United States v. City OF Chicago
  549 F.2d 415· 7th Cir.· 1977-01-11 ·cited 113×
  The court held that the withholding of federal revenue sharing funds from the City of Chicago was an improper and improvident exercise of equitable discretion.
• United States v. State OF Wash.
  520 F.2d 676· 9th Cir.· 1975-06-04 ·cited 110×
  The court held that the state could only regulate treaty Indian fishing for conservation purposes and that treaty Indians were entitled to an opportunity to catch up to 50% of the harvestable fish at their usual and accustomed grounds.
• LEE v. S. Home Sites Corp.
  429 F.2d 290· 5th Cir.· 1970-07-13 ·cited 108×
  The court held that the denial of compensatory and punitive damages was not an error, but remanded for further findings regarding attorney's fees due to lack of specific findings by the trial court.
• In re Mobilactive Media, LLC
  2013 WL 297950· Del. Ch.· 2013-05-08 ·cited 105×
  The court denied both plaintiff's motion for reargument and defendants' motion for reargument and to supplement the record. The court found that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a material and outcome-determinative misapprehension of fact or law, and that the defendants failed
• Holmes v. NEW York City Hous. Auth.
  398 F.2d 262· 2d Cir.· 1968-07-18 ·cited 96×
  The court held that the complaint stated a federal claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Fourteenth Amendment, and that the district court correctly refused to abstain from exercising its jurisdiction.
• Weaver v. CASA Gallardo, Inc.
  922 F.2d 1515· 11th Cir.· 1991-02-01 ·cited 90×
  The court should not determine that discriminatory discharges are not covered by 42 U.S.C. § 1981, as the Supreme Court's holding in Patterson v. McLean Credit Union did not address discriminatory discharges.
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Enter. Ass'n Steamfitters Local NO. 638 of U. A.
  542 F.2d 579· 2d Cir.· 1976-09-07 ·cited 82×
  The court held that backpay awards are permissible against unions under Title VII, and reversed the district court's restrictive limitations on who could claim backpay, particularly regarding written application requirements and those denied work referrals or apprenticeship oppor
• The Conservation Soc'y OF S. Vt., Inc. v. Sec'y OF Transp.
  508 F.2d 927· 2d Cir.· 1974-12-11 ·cited 80×
  The National Environmental Policy Act requires the responsible federal agency, not a state agency, to prepare its own environmental impact statement for federally funded projects. A district court has discretion to deny an injunction for NEPA violations if strong equities favor t
• Reta L. McCANTS v. Ford Motor Co., Inc.
  781 F.2d 855· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-03 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the case without prejudice, but remanded for the district court to consider imposing conditions on the dismissal.
• Mitchell v. Hodges Contracting Co. & Kenneth B. Hodges
  238 F.2d 380· 5th Cir.· 1956-11-14 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the construction of a radio-television building was covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act, but affirmed the denial of an injunction for other projects due to the employer's good faith efforts and minimal violations.
• The R. E. L. McCaskill Co. v. Dekle
  88 Fla. 285· Fla.· 1924-10-22 ·cited 63×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a final decree and order confirming sale in a specific performance action where the vendor Dekle sought to enforce a land purchase contract against assignee R.E.L. McCaskill Company. The court held that a vendor who can prove title through adver
• Tallulah Morgan v. Kerrigan
  530 F.2d 401· 1st Cir.· 1976-01-14 ·cited 62×
  The court affirmed the district court's desegregation plan, finding it constitutionally adequate and within the court's equitable powers, despite the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974.
• Hawkins v. Town OF Shaw
  461 F.2d 1171· 5th Cir.· 1972-03-27 ·cited 62×
  The court clarifies that proof of intent to discriminate is not always necessary to prevail in a case alleging racial discrimination in governmental affairs, and that disparities in municipal services can create a right of action under Section 1983.
• Schonfeld v. Penza
  477 F.2d 899· 2d Cir.· 1973-04-23 ·cited 56×
  The court held that while challenges to union official removal and eligibility might ordinarily require Secretary of Labor involvement, allegations of free speech suppression and procedural due process violations under Title I of the LMRDA grant federal courts jurisdiction.
• Danielson v. Joint Bd. OF Coat
  494 F.2d 1230· 2d Cir.· 1974-02-27 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the district court erred in issuing an injunction under § 10(l) because the union's picketing, aimed at securing a jobber's agreement in the garment industry, was protected by the § 8(e) proviso and did not violate § 8(b)(7)(C).
• Bailey v. Patterson
  323 F.2d 201· 5th Cir.· 1963-09-24 ·cited 53×
  The dissenting judge argues that the appellate court should affirm the trial court's decision to deny injunctive relief, deferring to the trial judge's discretion and local knowledge.
• Microsoftware Computer Sys., Inc. v. Ontel Corp.
  686 F.2d 531· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-12 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the denial of a stay motion, sought to defer to concurrent state court proceedings, is an appealable interlocutory order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) when the stay is sought to enable the prior determination of an equitable defense.
• Riegle v. Fed. Open Mkt. Comm.
  656 F.2d 873· D.C. Cir.· 1981-06-24 ·cited 49×
  The court held that while the Senator likely had standing under traditional tests, his claim should be dismissed due to separation of powers concerns, as he could seek redress from his legislative colleagues.
• Bowles v. Nu Way Laundry Co.
  144 F.2d 741· 10th Cir.· 1944-08-28 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the appellee violated the Emergency Price Control Act and Maximum Price Regulation 165 by increasing prices for certain laundry services and discontinuing discounts, and that an injunction should issue.
• Knox v. Spratt
  23 Fla. 64· Fla.· 1887-01-01 ·cited 49×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decision that overruled a demurrer to an amended bill of complaint. The court held that a purchaser who had notice of the vendor's limited interest in the property at the time of sale cannot compel specific performance of the con
• United States v. Monsanto
  852 F.2d 1400· 2d Cir.· 1988-07-01 ·cited 46×
  The post-indictment restraint and post-conviction 'relation back' provisions of the CFA are unconstitutional as applied because they conflict with a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice.
• Frederick L. v. Thomas
  557 F.2d 373· 3d Cir.· 1977-06-17 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the remedial order requiring the School District to submit a plan to identify all learning disabled students is an appealable injunctive order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining t
• Morales v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc.
  208 F.2d 218· 5th Cir.· 1953-12-09 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in dismissing the libel for laches, as the facts presented did not sufficiently excuse the delay in filing suit and prejudice to the respondent was presumed.
• United Presbyterian Church IN THE U.S.A. v. Reagan
  738 F.2d 1375· D.C. Cir.· 1984-07-17 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge Executive Order No. 12333 because they failed to allege specific, concrete, or imminent injury, and a Member of Congress's claim of diminished legislative power was also a generalized grievance.
• Palmer v. Wilson
  502 F.2d 860· 9th Cir.· 1974-08-16 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the creditor's security interest becomes automatically void upon the debtor's election to rescind under 15 U.S.C. § 1635(b), and rescission cannot be equitably conditioned on the debtor's repayment.
• Georgevich v. Judge Samuel Strauss
  772 F.2d 1078· 3d Cir.· 1985-09-05 ·cited 42×
  The court held that Pullman abstention is required because the case presents an unsettled question of state law regarding parole procedures that could obviate the need to decide a federal constitutional issue. The court also found that state judges are proper parties and that the
• Duran v. Elrod
  760 F.2d 756· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-12 ·cited 42×
  The dissenting judge believes the appellants failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion by the district court.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. World Radio Mission, Inc.
  544 F.2d 535· 1st Cir.· 1976-11-04 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the defendants' investment plans constituted securities subject to anti-fraud provisions, and the First Amendment did not shield them from disclosure requirements. A preliminary injunction should have been granted.
• Avery v. Wichita Falls Indep. Sch. Dist.
  241 F.2d 230· 5th Cir.· 1957-01-09 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint as moot, as the voluntary cessation of unlawful conduct does not automatically render a case moot, especially when good faith compliance is disputed.
• Westchester Lodge 2186 v. Ry. Express Agency
  329 F.2d 748· 2d Cir.· 1964-04-01 ·cited 39×
  A district court may exercise equitable discretion to grant an injunction maintaining the status quo in a minor labor dispute pending before the National Railroad Adjustment Board, but lacks jurisdiction if the dispute has not been submitted to the Board.
• Sim Asia v. Hiser
  38 Fla. 71· Fla.· 1896-06-01 ·cited 39×
  In this 1896 Florida Supreme Court case, Sim Asia sought specific performance of a land sale contract against the Hiser estate. The court held that Asia was not entitled to specific performance because he was guilty of laches and negligence, failed to perform timely installment p
• Moore v. U.S. House OF Representatives
  733 F.2d 946· D.C. Cir.· 1984-05-04 ·cited 38×
  The court abstains from deciding the dispute because the plaintiffs lack standing, as it is an intragovernmental dispute not properly before the judicial branch.
• Ebeling v. Woods
  175 F.2d 242· 8th Cir.· 1949-06-10 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the Administrator could seek restitution for rent overcharges under the Emergency Price Control Act even after its expiration, as the Act's saving clause preserved such rights.
• Shultz v. Parke
  413 F.2d 1364· 5th Cir.· 1969-07-18 ·cited 36×
• W. Va. OIL & GAS Co., Inc. v. George E. Breece Lumber Co., Inc.
  213 F.2d 702· 5th Cir.· 1954-06-04 ·cited 36×
  A federal court has jurisdiction to entertain an independent action to reform a prior judgment based on mutual mistake, even if subsequent transferees of the property are involved, provided those transferees can be joined without ousting jurisdiction.
• Captain Shelby C. Roberts v. Lemos
  651 F.2d 201· 3d Cir.· 1981-06-08 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the denial of travel expenses for a court-ordered witness and the denial of expert witness fees were abuses of discretion, reversing the lower court's decision on these costs.
• NEW Jersey-Philadelphia Presbytery OF THE Bible Presbyterian Church v. NEW Jersey State Bd. OF Higher Educ.
  654 F.2d 868· 3d Cir.· 1981-04-14 ·cited 34×
  The majority's rule allowing federal plaintiffs, not parties to a state proceeding, to interfere with that proceeding is unprecedented and contrary to established precedent.
• Williams v. Kimbrough
  415 F.2d 874· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying attorneys' fees to teachers dismissed in violation of a desegregation order.
• Ahwazi v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  751 F.2d 1120· 9th Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 32×
  The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) abused its discretion by failing to consider the factual basis of petitioners' motions to reopen deportation proceedings before weighing the ultimate equities of their cases.
• Hoitt v. Vitek
  495 F.2d 219· 1st Cir.· 1974-04-09 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of attorneys' fees to NHLA attorneys, finding the award to private counsel sufficient to serve the policy of encouraging representation.
• Coca-Cola Co. v. Standard Bottling Co.
  138 F.2d 788· 10th Cir.· 1943-11-08 ·cited 32×
  A court of equity has the power to modify an injunctive decree, even one entered by consent, when conditions and circumstances have materially changed.
• Williams v. The Neeld-Gordon Co.
  86 Fla. 59· Fla.· 1923-06-20 ·cited 31×
  This case involves a dispute over land ownership where a buyer, Williams, sought to enforce a contract after the seller conveyed the land to a third party, Neeld-Gordon Company, who had knowledge of the prior agreement. The court found that Williams' delay in performance was not
• Gutzwiller v. Fenik
  860 F.2d 1317· 6th Cir.· 1988-11-01 ·cited 30×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support claims of sex discrimination and substantive due process violations against the defendants, and that judicial intervention in academic tenure decisions is generally inappropriate.
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Local 638 ... Local 28 OF the Sheet Metal Workers' Int'l Ass'n
  753 F.2d 1172· 2d Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 30×
  The dissent argues that the majority erred in affirming the contempt finding because the union complied with the administrator's directives regarding the apprenticeship program, and the 29% goal should not be treated as an inflexible quota.
• State Water Control Bd. v. Russell E. Train United States Env't Prot. Agency
  559 F.2d 921· 4th Cir.· 1977-07-13 ·cited 30×
  Receipt of federal grants under Title II of the FWPCA is not a condition precedent to the duty to comply with the 1977 effluent standards for publicly owned sewage treatment plants.
• Hardy v. Hardy
  118 So. 2d 106· Fla. 1st DCA· 1960-02-04 ·cited 30×
  Helen Hardy appeals from an order discharging her ex-husband's delinquent alimony and child support obligations. The court holds that while the lower court has discretion to suspend or modify future child support payments when the custodial parent violates visitation rights, it c
• McCutcheon v. Nat'l Acceptance Corp.
  143 Fla. 663· Fla.· 1940-07-12 ·cited 30×
  McCutcheon sued for specific performance of a stock transfer agreement with National Acceptance Corporation and its president Frank Newman. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's dismissal, holding that specific performance of a contract to transfer closely-held sto