Injunction

5,622 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 6,125 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Sil-Flo v. SFHC
  917 F.2d 1507· 10th Cir.· 1990-10-30 ·cited 45×
  The court affirmed the district court's rulings, finding no reversible error in choice of law, jury instructions, evidentiary rulings, discovery, or dismissal of the RICO claim.
• Hancock Indus. & Ace Serv. Corp. & E. Waste Removal & Charles Crumbley, Inc. v. Schaeffer
  811 F.2d 225· 3d Cir.· 1987-02-06 ·cited 45×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court's grant of summary judgment was proper because the defendants were immune from antitrust liability under the state action doctrine and the haulers' procedural challenges were either harmless error or based on insufficient grounds.
• Found. on Econ. Trends v. Heckler
  756 F.2d 143· D.C. Cir.· 1985-02-27 ·cited 45×
  The court held that while the Foundation's failure to exhaust administrative remedies is problematic, the case will be remanded for agency consideration due to the importance and novelty of the issues.
• United Presbyterian Church IN THE U.S.A. v. Reagan
  738 F.2d 1375· D.C. Cir.· 1984-07-17 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge Executive Order No. 12333 because they failed to allege specific, concrete, or imminent injury, and a Member of Congress's claim of diminished legislative power was also a generalized grievance.
• Am. Motorcyclist Ass'n v. Watt
  714 F.2d 962· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-01 ·cited 45×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction, even considering potential NEPA violations, because the public interest in protecting fragile desert resources outweighed the plaintiffs' claims.
• Kenai OIL & GAS, Inc. v. The Dep't OF the Interior OF the United States
  671 F.2d 383· 10th Cir.· 1982-02-17 ·cited 45×
  The Superintendent cannot refuse approval of communitization agreements solely because he believes Indian lands would fare better economically outside the proposed unit.
• Piedmont Heights Civic Club, Inc. v. Moreland
  637 F.2d 430· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-20 ·cited 45×·via Temporary Injunction
  The dissenting judge believes the majority erred in its review standard and in finding that federal defendants complied with NEPA regarding alternatives and project segmentation.
• Brown v. Bd. OF BAR Exam'rs OF the State OF Nev. & Bd. of Governors of the State Bar of Nev.
  623 F.2d 605· 9th Cir.· 1980-07-18 ·cited 45×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A federal district court lacks jurisdiction to review a state court's decision on an individual application for admission to the bar, even if the claim alleges arbitrary application of rules or constitutional violations.
• SK&F v. Premo Pharm. Labs., Inc.
  625 F.2d 1055· 3d Cir.· 1980-05-28 ·cited 45×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that a preliminary injunction was properly granted, affirming that copying the distinctive trade dress of a drug can constitute unfair competition under New Jersey law, even if the product is unpatented.
• Ala. Rural Fire Ins. Co. v. Naylor
  530 F.2d 1221· 5th Cir.· 1976-04-30 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction because the suit was barred by sovereign immunity, as the claim was essentially for breach of contract, for which the Court of Claims provides an adequate remedy.
• Klaus v. Hi-Shear Corp.
  528 F.2d 225· 9th Cir.· 1975-12-15 ·cited 45×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that preliminary injunctions were improperly issued based on mistaken legal theories, particularly regarding irreparable harm and indispensable parties, and reversed or vacated several injunctions while affirming others.
• Mullis v. Arco Petroleum Corp. & Atl. Richfield Corp.
  502 F.2d 290· 7th Cir.· 1974-08-05 ·cited 45×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A local jobber cannot use the Robinson-Patman Act or Section 2 of the Sherman Act to prevent a lawful termination of their distributorship, even during a product shortage, if the termination itself is not unlawful and the defendant lacks monopoly power in the relevant market.
• City OF Boston v. Volpe
  464 F.2d 254· 1st Cir.· 1972-07-17 ·cited 45×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that a tentative allocation of federal airport aid funds, followed by a project application, does not federalize the project to the extent that construction must halt pending a final environmental impact statement.
• Dickinson v. Thornton Davis
  224 So. 2d 262· Fla.· 1969-04-02 ·cited 45×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a statute subjecting separately-owned mineral, oil, gas, and subsurface rights to separate ad valorem taxation. The Court rejected a challenge based on an earlier precedent invalidating a similar statute for improper deleg
• Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Free Sewing Mach. Co. & Apsco Prods., Inc.
  256 F.2d 806· 7th Cir.· 1958-06-23 ·cited 45×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in partially denying the motion for a preliminary injunction, as granting the full relief requested would have decided the case on its merits.
• Gray v. Golden
  89 So. 2d 785· Fla.· 1956-09-07 ·cited 45×
  Florida's Supreme Court reversed an injunction that barred submission of a proposed constitutional amendment granting home rule to Dade County, holding that the amendment did not violate the single-article limitation of Section 1, Article XVII, and that apparent internal contradi
• State v. Swope
  159 Fla. 18· Fla.· 1947-05-20 ·cited 45×·via Temporary Injunction
  Florida Supreme Court held that the 1945 amendments to the Real Estate Commission statute did not clearly transfer final jurisdictional authority from the Circuit Court to the Commission, despite apparent legislative intent. The Court construed the statute to authorize the Commis
• Watson v. Spessard L. Holland
  155 Fla. 342· Fla.· 1944-12-19 ·cited 45×
  Florida's Attorney General challenged oil leases granted to Arnold Oil Explorations, Inc. by the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund, arguing the trustees lacked authority to execute oil leases on sovereignty lands without competitive bidding. The Florida Supreme Court affi
• Lucile H. Lott v. City of Orlando
  142 Fla. 338· Fla.· 1939-09-26 ·cited 45×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Chapter 17981 (1937), which authorized cities to establish housing authorities to eliminate slums and provide low-cost housing for low-income residents. The court rejected a taxpayer's challenge that the housing program wa
• Metropolis Publ'g Co. v. Lee
  126 Fla. 107· Fla.· 1936-11-02 ·cited 45×
  Florida newspapers challenged a 1931 documentary stamp tax statute requiring stamps on advertising contracts. The Florida Supreme Court held that advertising agreements were not subject to the tax because they were executory agreements granting optional access to advertising spac
• El Modello Cigar Mfg. Co. v. Gato
  25 Fla. 886· Fla.· 1889-06-01 ·cited 45×·via Temporary Injunction
  El Modello Cigar Manufacturing Company appealed a chancery court decision upholding an injunction against their use of similar trade marks to those of Eduardo H. Gato's cigar brand. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the injunction but reversed the lower court's dismissal of the
• McWhorter v. The Pensacola & Atl. R.R. Co.
  24 Fla. 417· Fla.· 1888-06-01 ·cited 45×
  Railroad Commissioners appointed under Florida's 1887 railroad regulation statute sought to enforce fixed freight and passenger rates against the Pensacola and Atlantic Railroad Company. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the injunction against the Commissioners, holding that the
• The Trs. of the Internal Improvement Fund v. Bailey
  10 Fla. 112· Fla.· 1862-01-01 ·cited 45×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the 1855 Internal Improvement Act created a binding contract pledging a state fund to specific rail and canal projects, and that subsequent legislation cannot divert those funds to other purposes without violating bondholder rights. A bondholde
• Scott v. Williams
  107 So. 3d 379· Fla.· 2013-01-17 ·cited 44×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of 2011 pension reform legislation (Senate Bill 2100) that converted the Florida Retirement System (FRS) from a noncontributory to contributory system, requiring current members to contribute 3% of salaries and eliminating co
• Am. Legion Cmty. Club v. Murray Diamond
  561 So. 2d 268· Fla.· 1990-05-10 ·cited 44×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a suit to set aside a conveyance based on alleged violations of corporate bylaws and constitutional provisions is not an action "founded on a duly recorded instrument" under Florida Statutes § 48.23, and therefore a notice of lis pendens in suc
• Barry J. Koerpel, M.D. v. Heckler
  797 F.2d 858· 10th Cir.· 1986-07-23 ·cited 44×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that Dr. Koerpel's claims of liberty deprivation were sufficiently colorable to establish federal court jurisdiction, but ultimately found that he had not raised difficult or doubtful questions on the merits to warrant a preliminary injunction.
• 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).
• Taylor v. Teletype Corp.
  648 F.2d 1129· 8th Cir.· 1981-05-01 ·cited 44×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court affirmed the finding of classwide racial discrimination in demotions for 1974-1976, affirmed certain individual discrimination findings and relief, vacated the permanent injunction, and remanded for further proceedings on other individual claims.
• Aleknagik Natives Ltd. v. Andrus
  648 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1980-04-07 ·cited 44×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and should have granted preliminary injunctive relief.
• Gary W. v. State OF La.
  601 F.2d 240· 5th Cir.· 1979-08-24 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the district court did not err in appointing a Special Master to oversee implementation of a prior order protecting children's rights, nor in directing the state to pay the master's fees and expenses.
• Corenswet, Inc. v. Amana Refrigeration, Inc.
  594 F.2d 129· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-30 ·cited 44×·via Preliminary Injunction
  An express contract term allowing termination 'for any reason' permits arbitrary termination, and the Uniform Commercial Code's good faith obligation does not override such express terms.
• Gellert v. E. AIR Lines, Inc.
  370 So. 2d 802· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-04-17 ·cited 44×·via Mandatory Injunction
  Pilot Dan Gellert sued Eastern Airlines for intentional infliction of severe emotional distress, claiming the airline retaliated against his safety criticisms by grounding him, reprimanding him, and mishandling his duty bid. The court affirmed judgment for Eastern, holding that F
• de Filippis v. United States
  567 F.2d 341· 7th Cir.· 1977-12-05 ·cited 44×·via Modification Of Injunction
  The dissent argues that the district court abused its discretion by not granting a Rule 60(b) motion to modify an injunction prospectively, given subsequent Supreme Court precedent.
• DRY Creek Lodge, Inc. v. The United States
  515 F.2d 926· 10th Cir.· 1975-05-09 ·cited 44×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction and on the merits without proper notice and a full hearing, as the plaintiffs' allegations sufficiently invoked federal jurisdiction.
• Exxon Corp. v. Fed. Energy Admin. & Frank G. Zarb
  516 F.2d 1397· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1975-04-21 ·cited 44×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that Section 211(d)(2) of the Economic Stabilization Act does not preclude appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) for appeals from preliminary injunction orders.
• Cruz v. Skelton
  502 F.2d 1101· 5th Cir.· 1974-10-14 ·cited 44×·via Claim For Injunction
  Members of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles are immune from suits for damages under the Civil Rights Act for their parole decisions.
• DOE v. Bellin Mem'l Hosp.
  479 F.2d 756· 7th Cir.· 1973-06-01 ·cited 44×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A private hospital's refusal to perform abortions, even if it receives federal or state funding and is state-regulated, does not violate 42 U.S.C. § 1983 unless the state directly influences or participates in the decision.
• United States v. Joseph G. Moretti, Inc.
  478 F.2d 418· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-15 ·cited 44×·via Prohibitory Injunction
  The court held that while the district court had jurisdiction and the power to issue a mandatory injunction, the mandatory injunction requiring restoration must be vacated to allow the administrative process for an after-the-fact permit to be completed.
• PPG Indus., Inc. v. Cont'l OIL Co.
  478 F.2d 674· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-09 ·cited 44×
  A federal district court has discretionary power to stay an equity suit pending the outcome of a parallel state action, and this discretion was properly exercised in this case.
• Hodgson v. Corning Glass Works
  474 F.2d 226· 2d Cir.· 1973-02-02 ·cited 44×
  The court held that Corning Glass Works violated the Equal Pay Act by paying male night inspectors more than female day inspectors for substantially equal work, and that opening the night shift to women or implementing a 'red circle' rate did not cure the violation. The injunctio
• Bose Corp. v. Linear Design Labs, Inc.
  467 F.2d 304· 2d Cir.· 1972-09-21 ·cited 44×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction for patent infringement and Lanham Act violations, but modified the order to require the defendant to affix its name to a visible surface of the product.
• Bannercraft Clothing Co., Inc. v. The Renegotiation Bd.
  466 F.2d 345· D.C. Cir.· 1972-07-06 ·cited 44×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The Freedom of Information Act confers jurisdiction on district courts to enjoin administrative proceedings pending judicial determination of document disclosure, and the exhaustion doctrine does not preclude such injunctions when necessary to prevent irreparable injury.
• Am. Bible Soc'y v. Winton M. Blount
  446 F.2d 588· 3d Cir.· 1971-07-12 ·cited 44×·via Injunction Bond
  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.
• Aztec Motel, Inc. v. State ex rel. Earl Faircloth
  251 So. 2d 849· Fla.· 1971-06-30 ·cited 44×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that statutes authorizing forfeiture of corporate charters based on illegal activities by officers, directors, stockholders, or agents are unconstitutional because they are unconstitutionally vague and fail to provide adequate notice and ascertainab
• Shultz v. Hinojosa
  432 F.2d 259· 5th Cir.· 1970-07-29 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the employer's repeated violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, including failure to keep records and misclassification of employees, warranted an injunction and that certain workers were employees, not independent contractors, entitled to minimum wage and
• Lieberman v. Marshall
  236 So. 2d 120· Fla.· 1970-05-28 ·cited 44×·via Temporary Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a temporary injunction that prohibited SDS members from occupying university buildings without permission, holding that the university had a valid interest in maintaining campus order and that the students' constitutional rights to free speech a
• Brown v. Dunne
  409 F.2d 341· 7th Cir.· 1969-02-13 ·cited 44×
• Rich v. Ryals
  212 So. 2d 641· Fla.· 1968-07-02 ·cited 44×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a 1963 statute authorizing injunctions for zoning violations is constitutional, rejecting the District Court's conclusion that it unconstitutionally mandates judicial action. The Court ruled that a complaint alleging mere violation of zoning or
• Shapiro v. Cont'l Record Co., Inc.
  386 F.2d 426· 2d Cir.· 1967-11-28 ·cited 44×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court erred in denying plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction and interlocutory default judgment.
• Rural Electrification Administration v. N. States Power Co.
  373 F.2d 686· 8th Cir.· 1967-02-28 ·cited 44×
  The court held that private power suppliers lack standing to challenge the REA Administrator's loan decisions, as the regulations do not create legally enforceable rights for them and the matter is not a justiciable controversy.