Injunction Scope

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

• V. T. A., Inc. v. Airco, Inc.
  597 F.2d 220· 10th Cir.· 1979-04-19 ·cited 79×
  The court affirmed the denial of the Rule 60(b) motion, finding the sixteen-month delay unreasonable for claims under 60(b)(5) and (6), and the judgment not void under 60(b)(4). The court also affirmed the denial of the contempt motion, finding the differences between the Vac-Tec
• United States v. Miller
  588 F.2d 1256· 9th Cir.· 1978-11-13 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the sentence was enhanced by challenged allegations before relief under Weston is warranted. The judge's fine was not based on the challenged allegations but on defense counsel's suggestion.
• Belk's Dep't Store v. Scherman
  117 So. 2d 845· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-02-15 ·cited 48×
  A department store lessee obtained injunctions and a receiver appointment against the store owner without proper notice or bonds. The store owner appealed the denial of a motion to dissolve those orders. The appellate court held that while the underlying orders could stand, the c
• Plus Prods. v. Plus Disc. Foods, Inc.
  722 F.2d 999· 2d Cir.· 1983-11-03 ·cited 44×
  The court held that while the PLUS mark is weak and confusion is unlikely for non-competing goods, the injunction should be limited to the three overlapping products (pet foods, spices, food oils).
• Seaboard Rendering Co. v. Conlon
  152 Fla. 723· Fla.· 1943-04-09 ·cited 44×
  Seaboard Rendering Company operated an animal reduction plant that emitted offensive odors, constituting a nuisance to neighboring property owners. The trial court permanently enjoined the plant's operation, and the Florida Supreme Court affirmed, rejecting the appellant's argume
• George W. Luft Co., Inc. v. Zande Cosm. Co., Inc.
  142 F.2d 536· 2d Cir.· 1944-05-09 ·cited 42×
  The court held that while the domestic injunction and accounting were proper, the scope of the injunction and accounting for foreign business was too broad and needed modification based on established rights in foreign countries.
• Bowles v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.
  143 F.2d 38· 7th Cir.· 1944-05-26 ·cited 31×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction was properly granted and was not broader than warranted, given the defendant's systemic non-compliance with price regulations.
• Donovan v. Burger King Corp.
  672 F.2d 221· 1st Cir.· 1982-02-22 ·cited 29×
  The court held that assistant managers earning at least $250/week have management as their primary duty and are not exempt from FLSA overtime pay, but that the injunction against Burger King was overly broad in its geographic scope.
• A. & P. Food Stores, Inc. v. Kornstein
  121 So. 2d 701· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-06-20 ·cited 29×
  A&P Food Stores appeals from a permanent injunction and $7,500 damages award for alleged nuisance caused by its supermarket operations adjacent to the Kornsteins' residential property. The court affirmed the injunction in principle but found it overbroad and reversed the damages
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sunbeam Elec. MFG. Co.
  133 F.2d 856· 7th Cir.· 1943-02-06 ·cited 28×
  The court should modify paragraph 1 of the order, as its broad language is not justified by the specific unfair labor practices found.
• Banff, Ltd. v. Federated Dep't Stores, Inc.
  841 F.2d 486· 2d Cir.· 1988-03-10 ·cited 27×
  The court held that Bloomingdale's use of stylized 'B Wear' marks, including a lowercase 'b' and ribbon style, infringed Banff's 'Bee Wear' mark, and the injunction should be broadened to include them.
• Bresgal v. Brock
  833 F.2d 763· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-18 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the district court's declaratory judgment and injunction, but modified the injunction in part, and affirmed the denial of attorney's fees.
• Milk & Ice Cream Can Inst. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  152 F.2d 478· 7th Cir.· 1946-01-07 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the FTC's findings of a price-fixing conspiracy were substantially supported by the evidence, and the cease and desist order was largely appropriate, though one provision was overly broad.
• 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.
• Everest & Jennings, Inc. v. E & J Mfg. Co.
  263 F.2d 254· 9th Cir.· 1958-12-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while the plaintiff's trademark 'E & J' is entitled to protection, the trial court's injunction against all use of the defendant's 'E-J' mark was too broad, and the defendant has the right to register its mark for wheel chairs under specific conditions.
• Fontainbleau Hotel Corp. & Babs, Inc. v. Crossman
  323 F.2d 937· 5th Cir.· 1963-10-11 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the Hotel on damages for violations occurring before October 31, 1959, and that the injunction was too narrowly drawn. The court also affirmed the validity of the May 9 agreement and the corporate veil piercing.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  202 F.2d 177· 3d Cir.· 1953-02-10 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge believes the court's order is too broad and should be restricted to the specific parties and locations involved in the proven labor dispute.
• RON Matusalem & Matusa OF Fla., Inc. v. RON Matusalem, Inc.
  872 F.2d 1547· 11th Cir.· 1989-05-23 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the defendant's actions did not constitute a material breach of the sub-franchise agreement, and thus the plaintiff's termination of the agreement was invalid.
• State of Fla. ex rel. Little Beaver Theatre, Inc. v. Tobin
  258 So. 2d 30· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-02-15 ·cited 10×
  Little Beaver Theatre sought to enjoin prosecution for showing allegedly obscene films, challenging the constitutionality of Miami's obscenity ordinance. The trial court upheld the ordinance as constitutional and enjoined the theatre from showing three specific films within Dade
• Castrol, Inc. v. Quaker State Corp.
  977 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1992-10-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction against Quaker State's commercial, finding a likelihood that the claim of test-proven superiority was literally false.
• Ogelean Riddick & Suncoast Beauty Sch. of Fla., Inc. v. Suncoast Beauty Coll., Inc.
  570 So. 2d 1064· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-11-28 ·cited 8×
  The court reversed a permanent injunction granted against former beauty school owner Ogelean Riddick for allegedly violating a covenant not to compete. The injunction was improper because it named defendants over whom the court lacked personal jurisdiction and because it prematur
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Iowa Beef Processors, Inc.
  675 F.2d 1004· 8th Cir.· 1982-04-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board correctly determined that Iowa Beef Processors, Inc. violated sections 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act by discharging employees for engaging in protected activity, not sufficiently egregious misconduct.
• Unistrut Corp. v. Power
  280 F.2d 18· 1st Cir.· 1960-06-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's product did not infringe Patent No. 2,345,650 due to superficial differences and that the scope of the unfair competition injunction was not an abuse of discretion. It also affirmed findings on copyright and contract claims but vacated the judg
• Adoption HOT Line, Inc. v. State
  402 So. 2d 1307· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-08-18 ·cited 7×
  Adoption Hot Line, Inc. challenged a permanent injunction prohibiting all advertising of adoption referral services. The court reversed, holding that the injunction violated the First Amendment because it was broader than necessary to prevent unlawful activity under Florida's ado
• TWO Islands Dev. Corp. v. Clarke
  157 So. 3d 1081· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-02-25 ·cited 6×
  Two Islands Development Corporation and related entities appealed from a trial court's temporary injunction prohibiting them from constructing a paver sidewalk on residential property lots. The appellate court vacated and remanded the injunction, holding that the owner and develo
• Carmela Marengo & Marengo Interiors, Inc. v. Prop. Mgmt. Inc. OF S. Fla.
  472 So. 2d 1388· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-07-31 ·cited 6×
  Marengo appeals a temporary injunction granted to enforce a non-competition agreement. The court held that the injunction was overly broad and exceeded the scope of the parties' actual contractual agreement, requiring remand for a more limited injunction.
• ART Theatre Enters., Inc. v. State of Fla. ex rel. Richard E. Gerstein
  260 So. 2d 267· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-04-04 ·cited 6×
  Art Theatre Enterprises and its owners appealed a judgment enjoining them from showing obscene films and declaring their theater operations a public nuisance. The court affirmed the finding that the films were hard-core pornography but reversed the injunction as overbroad in both
• Cristina Tarantola, M.D. v. William B. Henghold, M.D, P.A.
  214 So. 3d 726· Fla. 1st DCA· 2017-03-07 ·cited 5×
  Dr. Cristina Tarantola appealed a temporary injunction enforcing a covenant not to compete in her employment contract with Dr. William Henghold. The court affirmed the injunction's core restriction on Mohs surgery services but reversed and remanded because the trial court's injun
• United States v. Bernadette Gedraitis
  690 F.2d 351· 3d Cir.· 1982-10-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the magistrate had jurisdiction to try contempt charges limited to misdemeanor penalties, and that the waiver of jury trial was valid. The evidence was insufficient to convict one defendant but sufficient for the other two.
• Atlas Supply Co. v. Atlas Brake Shops, Inc.
  360 F.2d 16· 6th Cir.· 1966-05-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the appellant's use of the 'Atlas' trademark infringed on the appellee's registered mark, the injunction prohibiting all use of the name was overly broad and should be limited.
• Breuil v. Hobbs
  166 So. 2d 825· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-06-23 ·cited 4×
  A boat manufacturer appealed a declaratory judgment that prohibited it from manufacturing boats using designs obtained under terminated licensing agreements with a marine architect. The court reversed, finding the injunction too vague and requiring the lower court to conduct proc
• Hotel & Rest. Emps. & Bartenders Union Local NO. 339 v. Creighton's Rest. Corp.
  115 So. 2d 30· Fla. 2d DCA· 1959-10-07 ·cited 4×
  A Florida appellate court upheld a temporary injunction against a union's picketing and strike activities at a non-interstate-commerce restaurant, but narrowed the injunction by striking overly broad provisions that prohibited inducing strikes and barred all entry onto the premis
• Interstate Commerce Comm'n v. Keeshin Motor Express Co., Inc.
  134 F.2d 228· 7th Cir.· 1943-03-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a broad injunction against a motor carrier charging less or more than its filed tariffs was justified, even if initial violations were limited in scope, because similar violations could be anticipated.
• Lever Bros. Co. v. United States
  981 F.2d 1330· D.C. Cir.· 1993-01-15 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the "affiliate exception" in 19 C.F.R. § 133.21(c)(2) is inconsistent with the Lanham Act's section 42 for physically different goods, but vacated the nationwide injunction as overbroad.
• Bowles v. Royal Wine & Liquor, Inc.
  155 F.2d 137· 7th Cir.· 1946-02-22 ·cited 3×
  The court held that an injunction prohibiting violations of existing and future price regulations concerning distilled spirits was not too broad when interpreted to apply to the same subject matter.
• Perez v. Humana Med. Plan, Inc.
  771 So. 2d 1· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-06-14 ·cited 2×
  Physicians Perez and Vazquez appealed two temporary injunctions issued under their non-compete agreements with Humana Medical Plan. The court affirmed the first injunction restricting work within a five-mile radius of Humana's clinic but reversed the second injunction that extend
• Cooper v. Honorable Enoch T. NIX
  496 F.2d 1285· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while an age-based exemption in university housing regulations violated equal protection, the permanent injunction improperly expanded the exemption beyond the scope of the violation.
• Stewart Paint MFG. Co. v. United Hardware Distrib. Co.
  259 F.2d 273· 8th Cir.· 1958-09-29 ·cited 2×
  The court denied both the appellant's motion to expand the injunction and the appellee's petition for rehearing.
• J. D. Graham and others v. Consol. Naval Stores Co.
  57 Fla. 418· Fla.· 1909-01-01 ·cited 2×
  In this mortgage enforcement case, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed interlocutory orders appointing a receiver and issuing temporary injunctions to preserve naval stores property pending litigation. The court upheld the trial court's broad interpretation of the mortgage's after
• Wallace v. Comprehensive Pers. Care Servs., Inc.
  275 So. 3d 782· Fla. 3d DCA· 2019-06-26
  A petitioner filing a petition to determine incapacity under Florida Statutes sections 744.3201 and 744.331 is not required to attach, incorporate, or reference the alleged incapacitated person's medical records or expert medical reports prepared in anticipation of the petition.
• Vidal v. Athletes USA, LLC
  223 So. 3d 799· Fla. 4th DCA· 2019-04-17
  The Fourth District affirmed a preliminary injunction against appellants in a commercial dispute involving the Athletes USA brand, remanding only for clarification of the injunction's scope regarding competitive restrictions.
• Eadgear, Inc. v. Baca
  93 So. 3d 1246· Fla. 1st DCA· 2012-08-15
• Manatee Cnty. v. J. Richard Kaiser Enters., Inc.
  874 So. 2d 38· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-05-07
  Manatee County appealed a trial court's dismissal of a contempt order against OuterLimits nightclub for alleged violations of an injunction designed to control noise and disorderly conduct. The appellate court affirmed the decision not to find contempt but reversed because the tr
• Castle & Cooke, Inc. v. Williams
  496 F.2d 857· 9th Cir.· 1974-04-23
  The court held that while market isolation prevented infringement claims on some marks, the strong similarity between the 'humanized' bee designs warranted an injunction on all food products.
• Wallace v. Folks
  30 Fla. Supp. 169· Duval Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1968-07-02
  The court held that presidential candidate George C. Wallace has an inherent right to control his campaign and enjoin unauthorized support efforts by others. The court found that Warren H. Folks violated a preliminary injunction by conducting fund-raising activities and maintaini
• Borg-Warner Corp. v. York-Shipley, Inc.
  308 F.2d 839· 7th Cir.· 1962-10-02
  The court held that the injunction entered on remand was too broad and specified the exact terms for an injunction that would be permissible.
• Hynes v. Grimes Packing Co.
  185 F.2d 338· 9th Cir.· 1950-11-10
  The court held that the injunction decree improperly extended beyond the Supreme Court's mandate by enjoining future regulations not at issue.
• United States v. Porhownik
  182 F.2d 829· 2d Cir.· 1950-05-24
  The court held that the 1949 amendment to the Housing and Rent Act reasserted rent control over apartments previously exempted, making the higher rents charged under 1948 leases unlawful after April 1, 1949.
• Morrison Cafeteria Co. v. Shamhart
  160 Fla. 540· Fla.· 1948-06-08
  A cafeteria may be enjoined from allowing its waiting customers to block access to an adjacent business's entrance on the public sidewalk, but the injunction must permit reasonable supervision of customer lines on the premises.
• Estep v. State
  156 Fla. 433· Fla.· 1945-10-05
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld an injunction barring William Estep from practicing medicine anywhere in Florida, rejecting his claims that the order striking his answer was arbitrary and that the statewide scope of the injunction was too broad. The court held that practicing me