Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 62(C)

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

• Rush Pettway and Peter J. Wrenn v. Am. Cast Iron Pipe Co.
  411 F.2d 998· 5th Cir.· 1969-05-22 ·cited 139×
  An employer cannot discharge an employee for making false statements in a request for reconsideration of an EEOC charge, as such statements are protected under Title VII's anti-retaliation provision.
• McCLATCHY Newspapers v. Cent. Valley Typographical Union NO. 46
  686 F.2d 731· 9th Cir.· 1982-07-14 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to enter an amended judgment while an appeal was pending, and that the arbitrator did not exceed his authority in interpreting the term 'strike'.
• Christian Science Reading Room Jointly Maintained v. City & Cnty. OF SAN Francisco
  784 F.2d 1010· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Airport's policy of refusing to rent to religious organizations, adopted to remedy perceived constitutional violations that did not exist, failed the rational relationship test and violated the Equal Protection Clause. The court also affirmed the district
• Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co. v. United Transp. Union
  422 F.2d 979· 7th Cir.· 1970-03-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act does not prohibit a district court from granting an injunction pending appeal, even if it found it lacked jurisdiction to grant an injunction below. The court also held that § 2, First, of the Railway Labor Act is not justiciable and d
• Bordallo v. Reyes
  763 F.2d 1098· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-21 ·cited 9×
  The Guam Visitors Bureau, established as a public corporation under Public Law 17-32, is not an agency or instrumentality of the government, and its structure does not contravene the Organic Act of Guam.
• Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO v. E. AIR Lines, Inc.
  847 F.2d 1014· 2d Cir.· 1988-05-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing an injunction to preserve the jurisdiction of the system board of adjustment, even after an appeal was filed, especially when parties consented to treat the matter as a new action.
• Baron v. Best Buy Co., Inc.
  79 F. Supp. 2d 1350· S.D. Fla.· 1999-12-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an appeal from an order denying a motion to compel arbitration divests the district court of jurisdiction over the aspects of the case involved in the appeal, thus mandating a stay of proceedings.
• Basicomputer Corp. v. Scott
  973 F.2d 507· 6th Cir.· 1992-09-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court properly exercised diversity jurisdiction and granted a preliminary injunction enforcing non-competition and confidentiality covenants, but erred in modifying the injunction based on an incorrect interpretation of Ohio law.
• Johnson v. Mortham
  926 F. Supp. 1540· N.D. Fla.· 1996-05-24 ·cited 1×
  The court denied the motion for a stay of remedial proceedings pending appeal, finding the movants failed to meet the burden for extraordinary relief. The court later granted reconsideration and vacated its prior order extending qualifying deadlines, deferring to the state legisl
• Hernandez v. Dugger
  839 F. Supp. 849· M.D. Fla.· 1993-12-08
  The court granted the state's motion for a stay pending appeal, allowing the petitioner to remain incarcerated, despite the grant of a writ of habeas corpus.
• Sherrill K. Duncan and Dora Mae Duncan v. Farm Credit Bank OF ST. Louis
  940 F.2d 1099· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-22
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the property was sold to a third party after the district court's judgment and the appellants failed to obtain a stay of that judgment pending appeal.