Injunction Pending Appeal

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

• United States v. Theron C. Lynd
  301 F.2d 818· 5th Cir.· 1962-04-10 ·cited 87×
  The appellate court granted a temporary injunction pending appeal, finding the trial court's refusal to grant an injunction was likely an abuse of discretion given the evidence of racial discrimination in voter registration.
• Application of the President & Directors OF Georgetown Coll., Inc.
  331 F.2d 1000· D.C. Cir.· 1964-02-03 ·cited 70×
  A single circuit judge has the authority to issue emergency writs to preserve the status quo in cases where a patient's life is in imminent danger and a judicial decision is needed.
• Stell v. Savannah-Chatham Cnty. Bd. OF Educ.
  318 F.2d 425· 5th Cir.· 1963-05-24 ·cited 53×
  The Court of Appeals held that the District Court abused its discretion by denying a preliminary injunction to desegregate schools, and framed an injunction for the District Court to enter.
• Record Revolution NO. 6, Inc. v. The City OF Parma
  638 F.2d 916· 6th Cir.· 1980-12-08 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the drug paraphernalia ordinances were unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, violating the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and reversed the district court's decision upholding them.
• Winnebago Tribe OF Nebraska v. Col. James W. RAY
  621 F.2d 269· 8th Cir.· 1980-03-13 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the Army Corps of Engineers' issuance of a permit to cross the Missouri River was not a "major federal action" requiring an Environmental Impact Statement under NEPA, and the Tribe failed to raise substantial environmental issues.
• Coal. FOR Basic Human Needs v. King
  691 F.2d 597· 1st Cir.· 1982-11-01 ·cited 36×
  A party can be considered a "prevailing party" for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 if they achieve a judicial victory that establishes a legal entitlement to relief, even if the relief is preliminary and later mooted by intervening events.
• Warm Springs DAM Task Force v. Lieutenant General William C. Gribble, Jr.
  565 F.2d 549· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-23 ·cited 35×
  The court denied the Task Force's motion for an injunction pending appeal, finding that the district court's determination that the Environmental Impact Statement complied with NEPA was not clearly erroneous and that the public interest favored expediting the appeal on the merits
• J-R Distribs., Inc. v. Eikenberry
  725 F.2d 482· 9th Cir.· 1984-02-06 ·cited 30×
  The majority opinion is flawed in holding that the use of the word 'lust' in defining prurient interest renders a statute facially overbroad under the First Amendment.
• United States v. City OF Chicago
  573 F.2d 416· 7th Cir.· 1978-02-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a showing of discriminatory purpose is not required for a Title VII violation, and that the district court erred in its findings regarding the job-relatedness of promotional examinations and the adequacy of validation studies.
• Cedar Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  560 F.2d 1153· 4th Cir.· 1977-07-06 ·cited 30×
  The court held that an indefinite continuance of a preliminary injunction hearing is appealable as a refusal of an injunction, and that dismissal of a complaint with prejudice is a final, appealable order. The court also found that the cases were not moot despite the strike endin
• Env't Def. Fund, Inc. v. Ellis Armstrong
  487 F.2d 814· 9th Cir.· 1973-11-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the New Melones Dam project was adequate under NEPA, and affirmed the district court's judgment denying injunctive relief.
• Weisberg v. Powell
  417 F.2d 388· 7th Cir.· 1969-10-03 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Secretary of State's intentional and purposeful discrimination in arranging ballot order, by favoring certain candidates through a Sunday mail pickup scheme, violated the Equal Protection Clause.
• McCOY v. La. State Bd. OF Educ.
  332 F.2d 915· 5th Cir.· 1964-06-05 ·cited 30×
  The court granted the motion for an injunction pending appeal, ordering the admission of the plaintiff and others similarly situated to the state college.
• Woods v. Theo R. Wright
  334 F.2d 369· 5th Cir.· 1964-07-20 ·cited 28×
  The denial of a temporary restraining order in this case is appealable because the delay until final judgment would cause irreparable loss and moot the claims. The district court should have entered a temporary restraining order.
• Armstrong v. The Bd. OF Educ. OF the City OF Birmingham
  323 F.2d 333· 5th Cir.· 1963-07-12 ·cited 28×
  The court granted an injunction pending appeal regarding desegregation efforts.
• Tex. & NEW Orleans R.R. Co. v. Brotherhood OF Railroad Trainmen
  307 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1962-07-06 ·cited 28×
  The court clarified factual findings and corrected inaccuracies in its prior opinion, but these changes did not alter the outcome of the appeal.
• Premachandra v. Mitts
  727 F.2d 717· 8th Cir.· 1984-02-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that Dr. Premachandra was not a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees because prior judicial denials of injunctive relief indicated the VA's actions were not legally required and therefore gratuitous.
• Alpine Lakes Prot. Soc'y v. Schlapfer
  518 F.2d 1089· 9th Cir.· 1975-05-01 ·cited 24×
  The court denied the motion for an injunction pending appeal, finding that the balance of equities did not favor its issuance.
• Collier v. Gray
  116 Fla. 845· Fla.· 1934-10-13 ·cited 24×
  D.B. Collier, a citizen of Manatee County, sought to enjoin Florida's Secretary of State from advertising and implementing a proposed constitutional amendment (Senate Joint Resolution No. 582) regarding judicial circuit reorganization. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the amendme
• Fla. Businessmen FOR Free Enter. v. The City OF Hollywood
  648 F.2d 956· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-10 ·cited 21×
  The court granted the motion for a stay and enjoined enforcement of the ordinance pending appeal, finding a substantial likelihood of success on the merits.
• State v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
  19 F.4th 1271· 11th Cir.· 2021-12-06 ·cited 20×
  Florida challenged a federal interim rule mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for healthcare workers at Medicare and Medicaid facilities, arguing the rule exceeded the Secretary's statutory authority, violated notice-and-comment procedures, and was arbitrary and capricious. The Eleve
• Smith v. Grady
  411 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1969-05-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction limiting picketing, the absolute prohibition on uttering any sounds was an abuse of discretion and must be modified to allow non-violent, non-threatening speech.
• Salomon Cohen v. L'Engle
  24 Fla. 542· Fla.· 1888-06-01 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court denied a motion for a preliminary injunction pending appeal in an equity case, holding that while it may possess inherent power to issue injunctions in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, such power should be exercised only when indispensable to protect a
• Birdie Mae Davis v. Bd. OF Sch. Comm'rs OF Mobile Cnty.
  322 F.2d 356· 5th Cir.· 1963-07-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying a preliminary injunction for school desegregation, as the defendants offered no sufficient reason for further delay.
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Food Town Stores, Inc.
  539 F.2d 1339· 4th Cir.· 1976-08-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the denial of a temporary restraining order under § 13(b) of the FTC Act is an appealable order, and granted an injunction pending appeal because the FTC demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success in proving the merger would violate antitrust laws.
• Coal. FOR Basic Human Needs v. King
  654 F.2d 838· 1st Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that it had appellate jurisdiction to review the denial of a TRO, and granted an injunction pending appeal requiring the state to resume AFDC payments, finding a likelihood of success on the statutory claim.
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Food Town Stores, Inc.
  547 F.2d 247· 4th Cir.· 1977-01-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that when a case becomes moot pending appeal due to events beyond the parties' control, the appellate court should vacate the lower court's judgment to prevent res judicata effect, but not vacate interlocutory orders like injunctions pending appeal.
• Laurenzo v. Miss. High Sch. Activities Ass'n, Inc.
  708 F.2d 1038· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-08 ·cited 12×
  A party is not considered a prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 solely because they obtained an injunction pending appeal based on a substantial case and balance of equities, without a determination of the merits.
• Quick v. Martin
  397 F.2d 644· D.C. Cir.· 1968-02-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the District Court erred in setting aside the Deputy Commissioner's award of temporary total disability benefits, as the employer did not adequately raise the issue of the extent of disability at the administrative level.
• Harris v. Gibson
  322 F.2d 780· 5th Cir.· 1963-09-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court's order continuing a temporary restraining order was an appealable interlocutory order and granted an injunction pending appeal to allow student transfers.
• Nat'l Ass'n FOR the Advancement OF Colored People v. Thompson
  321 F.2d 199· 5th Cir.· 1963-07-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court's order taking the motion for preliminary injunction under advisement was not an appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a).
• Eastern Greyhound Lines (A Division of the Greyhound Corporation) v. Fusco
  310 F.2d 632· 6th Cir.· 1962-12-04 ·cited 12×
  The court denied the motion for an injunction pending appeal, finding no present threat of irreparable injury and insufficient grounds to deviate from standard review procedures.
• Meredith v. Fair
  305 F.2d 341· 5th Cir.· 1962-02-12 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge believes the court should grant an injunction pending appeal to allow the appellant to transfer to the University of Mississippi.
• City OF Romulus v. Cnty. OF Wayne
  634 F.2d 347· 6th Cir.· 1980-11-06 ·cited 11×
  The appeal is moot because the runway construction has been completed, rendering the requested injunctive relief ineffectual.
• French v. Emmett W. Bashful
  425 F.2d 182· 5th Cir.· 1970-03-23 ·cited 11×
• Classic Components Supply, Inc. v. Mitsubishi Elecs. Am., Inc.
  841 F.2d 163· 7th Cir.· 1988-02-25 ·cited 10×
  The court denied the application for an injunction pending appeal because the moving party failed to demonstrate irreparable injury and the motion was frivolous.
• Population Inst. v. McPHERSON
  797 F.2d 1062· D.C. Cir.· 1986-08-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Administrator's determination to withhold funds was reasonable, but vacated the district court's dismissal and remanded for reconsideration based on a proper interpretation of the statute.
• Conservation LAW Found. OF NEW England, Inc. v. Andrus
  617 F.2d 296· 1st Cir.· 1979-11-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a likelihood of prevailing on the merits, and thus injunctive relief pending appeal was not warranted.
• Rainey v. Jackson State Coll.
  481 F.2d 347· 5th Cir.· 1973-06-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the College's refusal to hire Dr. Rainey for the 1970-71 and 1971 summer terms was based on constitutionally impermissible reasons, requiring separate consideration.
• 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
• Tribal Vill. OF Akutan v. Hodel
  869 F.2d 1185· 9th Cir.· 1988-10-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Secretary's rejection of the Governor's recommendations was not arbitrary or capricious, the environmental impact statement adequately complied with NEPA, and the Secretary satisfied ESA requirements by taking reasonably adequate steps to protect endangere
• 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.
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Weyerhaeuser Co.
  648 F.2d 739· D.C. Cir.· 1981-04-07 ·cited 8×
  The court granted the FTC's motion for an injunction pending appeal, finding a strong likelihood that the FTC would prevail on the merits and ordering the parties to return to the status quo.
• Friends OF THE Earth, Inc. v. Brinegar
  518 F.2d 322· 9th Cir.· 1975-03-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a $4,500,000 bond was unreasonable for a non-profit environmental organization seeking an injunction pending appeal in a NEPA case, reducing it to $1,000.
• Soc'y FOR Animal Rights, Inc. v. Schlesinger
  512 F.2d 915· D.C. Cir.· 1975-02-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that it could not conclude the district judge abused his discretion in denying an injunction pending appeal, given the narrow scope of review and the scanty record.
• Bradley v. Milliken
  438 F.2d 945· 6th Cir.· 1971-02-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that summary reversal is inappropriate without an evidentiary hearing on the alleged constitutional violations in the school system.
• Elgin v. Brotherhood OF Railroad Trainmen
  302 F.2d 545· 7th Cir.· 1962-05-03 ·cited 8×
• Dunn v. Retail Clerks Int'l Ass'n, AFL-CIO
  299 F.2d 873· 6th Cir.· 1962-03-16 ·cited 7×
  The court held that a mandatory injunction pending appeal should not be granted when it would provide the ultimate relief sought and there is doubt about the appellant's ultimate success.
• Smith v. Snow
  722 F.2d 630· 11th Cir.· 1983-12-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Georgia Parole Board's unfettered discretion in clemency proceedings means no constitutional right to procedural due process or Eighth Amendment protection against arbitrary application of the death penalty at this stage.
• In re Schokbeton Indus. v. Schokbeton Prods. Corp.
  449 F.2d 321· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-27 ·cited 6×
  The bankruptcy court has the inherent equitable power and statutory authority to issue injunctions to preserve its jurisdiction and enforce the Bankruptcy Act, including enjoining a licensor from terminating an executory contract with a debtor-in-possession.