Injunction Enforcement

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

• Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. Tampa S. R.R. Co.
  101 Fla. 468· Fla.· 1931-05-06 ·cited 172×
  Seaboard Air Line Railway sought to enjoin Tampa Southern Railroad from occupying its right-of-way and tracks known as Hog Creek Spur in Sarasota. After an injunction was granted, Tampa Southern violated it by laying tracks across the spur in 1928. The trial court discharged the
• Johnson v. Bednar
  573 So. 2d 822· Fla.· 1991-01-17 ·cited 83×
  A civil contempt fine imposed to coerce compliance with a court order may be discretionary and unrelated to actual damages suffered by the aggrieved party.
• Hanna v. Martin
  49 So. 2d 585· Fla.· 1950-12-19 ·cited 48×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a damages award stemming from a property owner's failure to comply with a previous injunction. The court held that the damages awarded were excessive because they included the cost of constructing a bulkhead, which was not a direct or necessary
• Lopez v. Hall
  233 So. 3d 451· Fla.· 2018-01-11 ·cited 42×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that attorney's fees may be awarded under section 57.105 in dating, repeat, and sexual violence injunction proceedings under section 784.046, resolving a conflict among district courts of appeal. The Court rejected the argument that the absence of f
• Sizzler Family Steak Houses v. W. Sizzlin Steak House, Inc.
  793 F.2d 1529· 11th Cir.· 1986-06-26 ·cited 35×
  The court affirmed the contempt order and sanctions against Western, finding them compensatory and not an abuse of discretion, but dismissed Sizzler's cross-appeal regarding the amount of sanctions.
• United States v. Wilber N. Olander
  584 F.2d 876· 9th Cir.· 1978-09-07 ·cited 31×
  The court held that a fisherman's conviction for criminal contempt for violating an injunction regulating fishing was affirmed if the fisherman knowingly violated the injunction, but reversed if the fisherman had complied with the injunction's requirements as interpreted by the c
• Frank Hettinger et ux. v. McMAHON
  164 So. 2d 553· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-06-03 ·cited 28×
  Appellants Frank and Jean Hettinger were found in contempt for allegedly violating an injunction decree requiring them to remove chicken manure from their premises at specified intervals to abate a nuisance. The appellate court reversed, holding that the decree was insufficiently
• AMF Inc. v. Jewett
  711 F.2d 1096· 1st Cir.· 1983-07-08 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying AMF's motion for civil contempt, finding that the defendants violated the consent decree by continuing to use prohibited names in directory listings and by drop-shipping non-AMF flowmeters with AMF's trademarks.
• The Castaway Lounge OF BAY Cnty., Inc. v. Reid
  411 So. 2d 282· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-03-18 ·cited 24×
  The Castaway Lounge of Bay County, Inc. appealed a trial court's award of attorney's fees under Florida Statutes Section 57.105 after it defaulted in a trademark/injunction case and subsequently violated the court's orders. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Section 57.10
• Williams v. City OF Dothan
  818 F.2d 755· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-05 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court erred in reconsidering issues previously decided under the law of the case doctrine and that the city's assessment project had a discriminatory effect violating a prior court order.
• Jackson v. State OF Miss.
  644 F.2d 1142· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the claim that prison officials violated a prior injunction requiring careful vetting of trusty shooters, as this injunction established a clearly defined constitutional right. However, summary judgment
• United States v. Partin
  524 F.2d 992· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-12 ·cited 18×
  A contemnor of a Boys Markets injunction does not have a constitutional or statutory right to a jury trial, even if the underlying statute is § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act.
• AIR Transp. Ass'n OF Am. (ATA) v. Prof'l AIR Traffic Controllers Org. (Patco)
  667 F.2d 316· 2d Cir.· 1981-12-18 ·cited 16×
  The district court retains jurisdiction to enforce a pre-Title VII injunction against federal employee strikes, and the passage of Title VII did not divest this jurisdiction.
• Rodriguez v. Swank
  496 F.2d 1110· 7th Cir.· 1974-05-09 ·cited 16×
  A federal court's civil contempt order imposing monetary sanctions for non-compliance with a prospective injunction requiring timely processing of AFDC applications is permissible under the Eleventh Amendment.
• Donovan v. Sureway Cleaners
  656 F.2d 1368· 9th Cir.· 1981-09-21 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the "agents" operating Sureway's retail outlets remained employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act despite contractual changes, and that the statute of limitations does not apply to civil contempt proceedings enforcing a prior injunction.
• Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. CO Petro Mktg. Grp., Inc.
  700 F.2d 1279· 9th Cir.· 1983-03-11 ·cited 14×
  The district court had jurisdiction to order the return of funds despite a bankruptcy filing, as the order enforced a prior injunction under the police or regulatory exception to the automatic stay, and the appellant violated that injunction by depositing the funds.
• United States v. Hosteen Tse-Kesi
  191 F.2d 518· 10th Cir.· 1951-08-30 ·cited 14×
  A court has jurisdiction to hear an injunction case and should not refuse to exercise it based on enforcement difficulties or inability to provide alternative housing for defendants.
• Bowles v. Meyers
  149 F.2d 440· 4th Cir.· 1945-05-11 ·cited 12×
  A district court cannot refuse to enforce a rent regulation order based on its own assessment of the order's reasonableness; such challenges must be brought before the Emergency Court of Appeals.
• Somerstein v. City OF Miami Beach
  319 So. 2d 158· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-07-29 ·cited 10×
  In this consolidated appeal, the court reviewed contempt orders against kosher caterers operating at Temple Emmanu-El in Miami Beach, finding that the trial courts erred in holding them in contempt because the injunction against operating a commercial catering business was insuff
• Hodgson v. A-1 Ambulance Serv., Inc.
  455 F.2d 372· 8th Cir.· 1972-02-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a district court cannot deny a contempt-purging wage payment order based on the employer's financial difficulties or potential business closure.
• Donald F. Duncan, Inc. v. Royal Tops Mfg. Co., Inc.
  343 F.2d 669· 7th Cir.· 1965-03-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in discharging a rule to show cause for contempt.
• In re Managed Care v. WellPoint, Inc.
  756 F.3d 1222· 11th Cir.· 2014-06-18 ·cited 9×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part the district court's contempt order. The court affirmed the injunction as to Appellants' RICO and antitrust claims, finding they were released by the settlement agreement. However, the court vacated the injunction as to ce
• Douds v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n
  224 F.2d 455· 2d Cir.· 1955-06-24 ·cited 8×
• Travelers Indem. Co. v. Bailey
  2d Cir.· 2009-06-18 ·cited 7×
  The terms of a bankruptcy court's 1986 injunction barring claims related to insurance policies bar subsequent state-law actions against the insurer for its own alleged misconduct, and the finality of those orders prevents collateral attack on the bankruptcy court's jurisdiction.
• Criselda Lopez v. Bentley
  678 So. 2d 333· Fla.· 1996-08-22 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a district court decision denying a petition for writ of prohibition that sought to prevent prosecution for indirect criminal contempt based on violation of a repeat violence injunction. The Court applied its prior holding in Walker v. Bentley tha
• McBRIDE v. Coleman
  955 F.2d 571· 8th Cir.· 1992-01-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that compensatory sanctions for contempt are not barred by sovereign immunity, as they are necessary to enforce judicial orders and make injured parties whole.
• Rapoport v. Rapoport
  416 F.2d 41· 9th Cir.· 1969-08-20 ·cited 6×
• Credit Serv., Inc. v. Fleming
  372 F.2d 143· 5th Cir.· 1967-01-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a prior finding regarding employee engagement in commerce was not res judicata for subsequent proceedings involving different employees and evolving facts, and that the employees were indeed engaged in commerce under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
• Sun-Maid Raisin Growers OF California v. Cal. Packing Corp.
  273 F.2d 282· 9th Cir.· 1959-12-14 ·cited 6×
  The assignment of a trademark does not automatically extinguish the assignor's right to enforce a prior injunction related to that trademark, absent valid grounds for dissolution.
• Bigelow v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.
  183 F.2d 60· 7th Cir.· 1950-06-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court had the discretionary power to permit an extended first run of a motion picture, as the decree was susceptible to an interpretation allowing such flexibility based on the film's merits and the absence of intent to harm plaintiffs' rights.
• LaROSE v. A.K.
  32 So. 3d 77· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-07-24 ·cited 5×
  The University of Tampa and a faculty member appealed an order enforcing a temporary injunction against the university. The appellate court reversed, holding that the enforcement order improperly granted permanent injunctive relief by requiring the university to drop a course fro
• In re Amendments to the Fla. Fam. Law Rules of Procedure
  95 So. 3d 126· Fla.· 2012-07-12 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court adopted amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure to implement new legislation creating a cause of action for injunctions for protection against stalking. The amendments update multiple rules to add stalking to existing references for domes
• Amendments to the Fla. Fam. Law Rules of Procedure
  746 So. 2d 1073· Fla.· 1999-01-28 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court issued amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, modifying several rules based on comments received following an October 1998 opinion. The amendments address confidentiality of records, expert witness procedures, injunctions for domestic a
• Powell v. Coughlin
  953 F.2d 744· 2d Cir.· 1991-12-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the OMH policy allowing confidential consultations between mental health staff and hearing officers is permissible, and that individual disciplinary hearing outcomes should not be automatically reversed without harmless error analysis.
• In re China Peak Resort v. Sierra Summit, Inc.
  847 F.2d 570· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-25 ·cited 4×
  The Ninth Circuit held that the bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to enforce its prior injunction and should not have abstained from ruling on the Board's attempt to collect use tax on rentals of assets purchased from a bankruptcy estate.
• Ash v. Campion
  247 So. 3d 581· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-02-05 ·cited 2×
  A contempt fine that imposes a flat, unconditional penalty without a purge provision and is not supported by findings of actual loss constitutes a criminal sanction requiring compliance with Rule 3.840; noncompliance with Rule 3.840 constitutes fundamental error requiring reversa
• City Cab Co. of Orlando, Inc. v. All City Yellow Cab, Inc.
  581 F. Supp. 2d 1197· M.D. Fla.· 2008-10-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that service by mail on a nonparty bound by an injunction, to multiple addresses and counsel, was sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction for contempt proceedings, and thus the contempt judgment was not void.
• City OF Cocoa Beach v. Vacation Beach, Inc.
  876 So. 2d 719· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-07-02 ·cited 2×
  The City of Cocoa Beach appeals a contempt order imposing sanctions for violating an injunction that stayed enforcement of voter-approved referendum amendments restricting building height and density. The appellate court reversed, holding that the injunction only prohibited enfor
• Shalonda Washington v. Hon. Warren Burk
  704 So. 2d 540· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-01-03 ·cited 2×
  Shalonda Washington sought a writ of prohibition to bar her trial for indirect criminal contempt of violating a domestic violence injunction, arguing the speedy trial rule barred the prosecution because the 90-day period had expired. The court receded from prior precedent and hel
• Royal Floral Distribs., Inc. v. Karukin
  625 So. 2d 1307· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-11-02 ·cited 2×
  Royal Floral Distributors sought to enforce a non-compete agreement against two former employees, Karukin and Lananna, who left to start a competing business. The trial court initially modified the injunction to exclude Lananna based on an erroneous finding that he had not signed
• United States v. Martin-Trigona
  756 F.2d 260· 2d Cir.· 1985-02-28 ·cited 2×
  The Court held that the injunction's 'new action' provision could not be validly applied to punish the appellant for criminal contempt for refiling a suit previously dismissed on venue grounds, as this would raise due process concerns.
• Champion Spark Plug Co. v. T. G. Stores, Inc.
  356 F.2d 462· 4th Cir.· 1966-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff was not engaged in intrastate commerce in Maryland and that the fair trade contract's 'fleet operator' exemption was too indefinite for enforcement.
• Plomb Tool Co. v. Fayette R. Plumb, Inc.
  171 F.2d 945· 9th Cir.· 1949-01-13 ·cited 2×
  The Court of Appeals held that the contempt judgment, which enlarged upon the original injunction, was appealable and granted a stay of its enforcement pending further order.
• Premier Franchise Mgmt. LLC v. Poolscapes Fla., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-03-03
  The court granted the parties' joint motion for a stipulated permanent injunction, resolving the injunctive relief sought by the plaintiff.
• Reger v. All Things Gel, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-05-29
  The court approved the magistrate judge's reports and recommendations, granting in part and denying in part the motion to enforce an injunction, for contempt, and for sanctions.
• Paris v. Guberman PMC, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-05-03
  The court held that a motion for default judgment must be denied due to inadequate proof of service and because the plaintiffs sought relief on counts previously dismissed.
• Berk-Fialkoff v. Wilmington Tr.
  358 So. 3d 472· Fla. 5th DCA· 2023-03-24
  An injunction in a receivership case must comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(c) by specifying reasons for entry and containing factual findings on all four elements required for an injunction: likelihood of irreparable harm, unavailability of adequate remedy at law
• Bauer v. Chronister
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-07-29
  The court held that the Sheriff's office's alleged failure to arrest a domestic violence perpetrator did not violate the Due Process Clause and that no special duty existed under Florida law to support a negligence claim.
• United States v. Espinal
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-08-18
  The court held that the defendant Milagros Espinal was in contempt of the court's permanent injunction for preparing tax returns in violation of the injunction, based on clear and convincing evidence.
• Inversiones y Procesadora Tropical Inprotsa, S.A. v. Del Monte Int'l GMBH
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-08-10
  The court held that INPROTSA was in contempt for violating court injunctions and adopted the magistrate judge's recommendations regarding sanctions, awarding attorney's fees but denying disgorgement of revenues.