Injunction Bond

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

• The People OF the State OF Cal. ex rel. v. The Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency
  766 F.2d 1319· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 102×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction that restricted shorezone repairs and construction, nor in dispensing with a bond requirement for the plaintiffs.
• Am. Hosp. Supply Corp. & Am. v. Mueller
  780 F.2d 589· 7th Cir.· 1986-01-02 ·cited 87×
  The court affirmed the preliminary injunction, finding that the distributor demonstrated a threat of irreparable harm due to the supplier's insolvency and that the district court properly balanced the harms.
• Camenisch v. The Univ. OF Tex.
  616 F.2d 127· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-28 ·cited 78×
  The court held that a private right of action exists under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act for injunctive relief, and that plaintiffs are not required to exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit.
• Coyne-Delany Co., Inc. v. Cap. Dev. Bd. OF the State OF Ill.
  717 F.2d 385· 7th Cir.· 1983-09-12 ·cited 66×
  A district court's discretion to deny costs or damages on an injunction bond is not unlimited and requires more than just the absence of bad faith; a good reason must exist. Damages are generally limited to the bond amount unless bad faith is shown.
• DOE v. Bailey Marshall
  622 F.2d 118· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-21 ·cited 60×
  A case is moot if the student has graduated and the suit sought only injunctive relief, even if attorneys' fees are requested. However, the mootness does not preclude a determination of attorneys' fees if the plaintiff is a prevailing party.
• Ferrero v. Associated Materials Inc.
  923 F.2d 1441· 11th Cir.· 1991-02-01 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the new Georgia statute permitting reformation of covenants not to compete applies retroactively and that the preliminary injunction was properly granted under federal procedural standards.
• United States Steel Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  456 F.2d 483· 3d Cir.· 1972-02-03 ·cited 57×
  The court held that recovery of attorneys' fees and expenses incurred due to an improvidently issued injunction is limited to the amount of the injunction bond when pursued in the same proceeding.
• Lever Bros. Co. v. Int'l Chem. Workers Union
  554 F.2d 115· 4th Cir.· 1976-11-30 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, holding that the dispute was arbitrable, the preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo pending arbitration was properly issued, and the injunction bond was correctly conditioned on the wrongful issuance of the injunction r
• Am. Bible Soc'y v. Winton M. Blount
  446 F.2d 588· 3d Cir.· 1971-07-12 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the suits were not moot because the existence of injunction bonds created a likelihood of future litigation on the same issues, and that the Postmaster General's actions are subject to judicial review for arbitrariness, capriciousness, or unconstitutionality.
• Savage v. Parker
  53 Fla. 1002· Fla.· 1907-01-01 ·cited 43×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed an interlocutory injunction granted ex parte against an executor accused of mismanaging estate cattle. The court held that the plaintiff's showing was insufficient under applicable law and that the injunction was granted without proper statutory
• Shea v. Cent. Diagnostic Servs., Inc.
  552 So. 2d 344· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-11-22 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the trial court erred in ordering the return of the injunction bond, as the defendants are entitled to seek damages for wrongful issuance.
• Klein v. Califano
  586 F.2d 250· 3d Cir.· 1978-09-29 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the appeal was moot regarding the prospective application of the district court's injunction, as the nursing home had been recertified as a qualified Medicaid provider. However, the appeal was not moot concerning the government's intention to seek recoupment o
• Am. CAN Co. v. Ishwar Mansukhani
  742 F.2d 314· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-30 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the temporary restraining order was improperly issued ex parte because there was no valid reason for proceeding without notice and it failed to comply with Rule 65(b)'s procedural requirements. The preliminary injunction was also deemed erroneously granted due
• Zuckerman v. Prof'l Writers OF Fla., Inc.
  398 So. 2d 870· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-04-29 ·cited 36×
  The appellate court affirmed a trial court's issuance of a temporary restraining order and prejudgment writs of replevin against former employees who allegedly removed corporate records from their employer. The court held that circumstantial evidence and testimony at the motion-t
• S & T Builders v. Globe Props., Inc.
  944 So. 2d 302· Fla.· 2006-11-16 ·cited 35×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that trial courts may include reasonably foreseeable attorney's fees in a lis pendens bond, resolving a conflict between district courts. The decision approves the Fourth District's reasoning that attorney's fees are recoverable damages in lis pende
• Middlewest Motor Freight Bureau v. United States
  433 F.2d 212· 8th Cir.· 1970-10-06 ·cited 34×
  The court held that shippers are entitled to restitution for excessive rates charged during the period of the temporary restraining order, as the ICC's cancellation order rendered the increased tariffs unlawful.
• Delphia Neal v. Evans Clay Neal
  636 So. 2d 810· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-05-03 ·cited 33×
  In a dissolution of marriage case, the Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed a trial court's imposition of severe sanctions against the wife, including striking all her pleadings and dismissing her counterclaim with prejudice for alleged discovery non-compliance. The co
• Lewis v. Lewis
  66 So. 2d 260· Fla.· 1953-07-17 ·cited 32×
  Art Lewis seeks to quash an injunctive order issued after a prior injunction was dissolved and the bond discharged, arguing it was issued without a proper bond.
• United States v. Bedford Assocs.
  618 F.2d 904· 2d Cir.· 1980-02-05 ·cited 28×
  The court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the government's appeal from the preliminary injunction's condition requiring payment of utilities, and that the district court had jurisdiction to impose such a condition, but the injunction must be modified.
• Provident Mgmt. Corp. v. City OF Treasure Island
  718 So. 2d 738· Fla.· 1998-05-07 ·cited 27×
  This case concerns whether a real estate management firm, Provident Management Corporation, is entitled to damages for business loss resulting from a city's enforcement of a land use ordinance, with the dissent arguing against such entitlement based on sovereign immunity.
• Longshore Lakes Joint Venture v. Mundy
  616 So. 2d 1047· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-03-19 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the grant of a temporary injunction but reversed and remanded because the trial court set the injunction bond without allowing the parties to present evidence on the appropriate bond amount.
• Provident Mgmt. Corp. v. City OF Treasure Island
  796 So. 2d 481· Fla.· 2001-05-24 ·cited 26×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that sovereign immunity limitations under section 768.28 do not apply to damages awards resulting from wrongfully issued preliminary injunctions obtained by governmental entities. When a court dispenses with the bond requirement for a governmental e
• 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.
• United Farm Workers OF Am., AFL-CIO v. Quincy Corp.
  681 So. 2d 773· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-09-20 ·cited 26×
  The Florida First District Court of Appeal quashed a temporary ex parte injunction against the United Farm Workers of America prohibiting picketing at Quincy Farms because the trial court failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements under Florida Rule of Civil Procedur
• Dep't OF Legal Affairs v. Bradenton Grp., Inc.
  727 So. 2d 199· Fla.· 1998-09-24 ·cited 25×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that violations of the bingo statute (section 849.0931) do not constitute illegal lotteries subject to RICO forfeiture, regardless of whether the organization conducting bingo is authorized or unauthorized. The Court rejected the district court's ar
• W.J. Spradley, Jr. v. OLD Harmony Baptist Church
  721 So. 2d 735· Fla. 1st DCA· 1998-07-27 ·cited 24×
  The court reversed an injunctive order issued by the trial court that imposed requirements on the appellants regarding use of disputed property by a church, finding the injunction was legally insufficient because it was entered sua sponte without a proper request, contained manda
• Stacey G. v. Pasadena Indep. Sch. Dist.
  695 F.2d 949· 5th Cir.· 1983-01-20 ·cited 24×
  Federal courts should exercise caution when using equitable powers to enlarge congressionally created programs, ensuring actions align with congressional intent.
• Tampa Port Auth. v. Deen
  179 So. 2d 416· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-10-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court erred in issuing an injunction without notice and without requiring a bond, and that the complaint's verification was insufficient.
• Groff G.M.C. Trucks, Inc. v. Driggers
  101 So. 2d 58· Fla. 1st DCA· 1958-02-25 ·cited 24×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, stating it cannot direct the lower court on how to proceed beyond the scope of the appeal.
• Hoffman v. Barlly
  97 So. 2d 355· Fla. 3d DCA· 1957-10-10 ·cited 24×
  Hoffman appealed a decree denying his equity suit for corporate dissolution and accounting, and awarding attorney's fees and expenses to defendants. The court affirmed the dismissal of Hoffman's suit but reversed the award of attorney's fees to defendants, holding that absent sta
• Olin Water Servs. v. Midland Research Labs., Inc.
  774 F.2d 303· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-02 ·cited 22×
  The appeal from the preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot because the injunctions have expired and the issues are not preserved for appeal, requiring a trial on the merits.
• Morgan v. Marshall
  78 Fla. 59· Fla.· 1919-07-01 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed a lower court's denial of a motion to stay execution on a judgment. The defendants argued that a default judgment was improperly entered due to attorney illness, a settlement agreement was breached, and the judgment/execution forms were defective. The appellate
• Forrest v. Citi Residential Lending, Inc.
  73 So. 3d 269· Fla. 2d DCA· 2011-06-29 ·cited 20×
  A law firm representing defendants in a mortgage foreclosure action posted video depositions of nonparty witnesses on YouTube without their consent. The trial court issued a temporary injunction prohibiting further posting. The appellate court upheld the injunction as a proper ex
• Wasserman v. Gulf Health, Inc.
  512 So. 2d 234· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-08-12 ·cited 20×
  Wasserman and Continental-Health Insurance appealed a contempt finding against them, while Gulf Health cross-appealed the denial of motions to dissolve temporary injunctions. The court affirmed the contempt order but reversed and remanded regarding the injunctions, finding them d
• Eisenberg v. Wellington Hall Nursing Home
  651 F.2d 902· 3d Cir.· 1981-06-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to order reinstatement of discharged employees under section 10(j) of the NLRA, as such relief is necessary to preserve the integrity of the collective bargaining process.
• Int'l Union v. Dana Corp.
  697 F.2d 718· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-10 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the case is moot because the parties' settlement agreement resolved all issues, and the exceptions to mootness do not apply.
• Fla. High Sch. Activities Ass'n v. Mander
  932 So. 2d 314· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-02-01 ·cited 18×
  The Florida High School Activities Association (FHSAA) appealed a temporary restraining order allowing a private-school student to play volleyball on a public middle-school team. The appellate court reversed the order because it was issued without reasonable notice to the FHSAA a
• de Leon v. Aerochago, S.A.
  593 So. 2d 558· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-01-28 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion to dissolve the temporary injunction because the appellees failed to demonstrate a clear legal right and the likelihood of irreparable harm, as they had an adequate remedy at law.
• Page Commc'ns Eng'rs, Inc. v. Fkoehlke
  475 F.2d 994· D.C. Cir.· 1973-03-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that Rule 65(c) does not mandate automatic assessment of damages on an injunction bond, and the district court has discretion to refuse damages in the interest of equity and justice.
• Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Polk Pools, Inc.
  124 So. 2d 737· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-12-01 ·cited 18×
  Polk Pools, Inc. sued Metropolitan Dade County seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against an alleged misinterpretation of county building ordinances requiring plumbing permits for pool construction drainage systems. The trial court granted a temporary restraining order wit
• Anderson v. Tower Amusement Co.
  118 Fla. 437· Fla.· 1935-02-16 ·cited 18×
  Marie W. Anderson sought injunctive relief to prevent Tower Amusement Company and D. V. Marquis from interfering with her tenant's possession of leased premises in violation of a restrictive covenant. The Florida Supreme Court granted a constitutional writ of injunction on appeal
• N. Am. Prods. Corp. v. Moore
  196 F. Supp. 2d 1217· M.D. Fla.· 2002-04-02 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the employer established a likelihood of success on the merits regarding the employee's material breach defense and the enforcement of the 1998 non-solicitation agreement, but not the 1991 agreement due to unresolved novation issues.
• Instant AIR Freight Co. v. C.F. AIR Freight, Inc.
  882 F.2d 797· 3d Cir.· 1989-08-17 ·cited 17×
  The dissenting judge believes the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding irreparable harm and that injunctive relief was warranted.
• Eldon v. Perrin
  78 So. 3d 737· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-02-08 ·cited 16×
  Charles Eldon appealed a temporary injunction granted against him. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed because the injunction order lacked sufficient factual findings supporting each element of the four-part injunction test and failed to set an appropriate bond a
• City OF Hallandale & Richard C. Fox v. Inglima
  346 So. 2d 84· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-04-07 ·cited 16×
  Two consolidated appeals challenging the trial court's injunctive orders requiring reinstatement of dismissed police officers. The appellate court reversed both injunctive orders, finding they violated procedural requirements for temporary injunctions (lack of bond, premature res
• Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters v. Miami Retail Grocers, Inc.
  76 So. 2d 491· Fla.· 1954-12-17 ·cited 16×
  The Florida Supreme Court addresses whether a lower court properly issued an injunction in a labor dispute without requiring the plaintiff to post a bond as required by statute. The Court holds that while the injunction was properly issued, the lower court erred in failing to req
• City OF Miami Beach v. Kuoni Destination Mgmt., Inc.
  81 So. 3d 530· Fla. 3d DCA· 2012-02-08 ·cited 15×
  The City of Miami Beach appealed a temporary injunction preventing it from closing a private birthday party at a residential property, claiming the event violated the city's commercial use ordinance. The appellate court found the issue moot because the party had already occurred
• Humana, Inc. v. Avram A. Jacobson, M.D., P.A.
  804 F.2d 1390· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that service of process was validly perfected under state rules after an attempted mail service failed, and the record supported the district court's finding of irreparable injury justifying a preliminary injunction.
• Wash. Steel Corp. v. TW Corp.
  602 F.2d 594· 3d Cir.· 1979-07-20 ·cited 14×
  A commercial bank is not per se precluded from financing one client's takeover of another client, even if the bank has a lending relationship and received confidential information from the target company.
• Associated Gen. Contractors OF Minn. v. Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs Twin City Local NO. 49
  519 F.2d 269· 8th Cir.· 1975-07-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a work stoppage due to a sympathy strike is an arbitrable dispute under collective bargaining agreements containing no-strike clauses and arbitration provisions, and an injunction pending arbitration is appropriate under Boys Markets if equitable prerequisites