5,622 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 6,142 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the Plaintiff's motion for default judgment.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-11-21
The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine deprives federal courts of subject matter jurisdiction over claims that seek to modify or overturn state court judgments.
-
The court held that the arbitration agreement is enforceable and the case should be stayed pending arbitration, as the plaintiff failed to demonstrate unconscionability or that equitable carve-out provisions precluded arbitration.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits.
-
The court recommended granting the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from infringing on the plaintiff's trademarks.
-
An ex parte order prohibiting removal or disposal of marital home contents constitutes a temporary injunction that must comply with statutory requirements, including sufficient factual findings, a bond requirement, and an evidentiary hearing on motions to dissolve or modify.
-
11th Cir.·
2025-11-17
The court held that the repeal of 12 U.S.C. § 1441a did not terminate Florida Housing's contractual obligations under the affordable housing agreement, as the agreement itself provided for its enforceability by the RTC or its successor agency.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-11-14
A petitioner filed an emergency petition for habeas corpus or injunction on behalf of a patient, but the case was rendered moot when the patient died before the court could rule on the merits. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal as moot.
-
The court held that the motion for a temporary restraining order must be denied due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with procedural requirements.
-
The court granted a temporary restraining order against the defendant, enjoining her from retaining or using the plaintiff's confidential information, finding a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
-
The court denied the parties' motions for consent injunctions, finding that the proposed language regarding who is bound and the duration of the permanent injunction required modification to comply with Rule 65.
-
The court granted Plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction, enjoining Defendants from using the DESIGNICE trademark on infringing products and restraining their assets.
-
A public employee's interest in free speech does not outweigh the employer's interest in effective and efficient fulfillment of its responsibilities when the speech causes significant disruption and public trust concerns.
-
A nonfinal order denying an injunction against domestic violence is appealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(B), which expressly authorizes review of orders that deny injunctive relief.
-
The court denied the motion for a temporary restraining order because the movant failed to satisfy the procedural requirements, specifically regarding notice to the opposing party.
-
The court held that a party seeking only money damages cannot obtain a preliminary injunction or stay to preserve funds in the court registry solely to ensure satisfaction of a potential future judgment.
-
The court held that plaintiffs failed to establish irreparable harm, a prerequisite for injunctive relief.
-
The court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable injury.
-
The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for an antisuit injunction, enjoining the defendant from prosecuting her claims in New York. The court found that valid Delaware forum selection clauses in the corporate charter and financing agreements required the defendant to litigate h
-
The court recommended granting the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, finding a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of trademark infringement claims and irreparable harm if relief is not granted.
-
The court accepted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the Plaintiff's motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.
-
The Court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting a renewed Temporary Restraining Order to prevent the removal of a child from the jurisdiction.
-
The court recommended granting the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, finding a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of trademark infringement claims and irreparable harm if relief is not granted.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction was denied because it failed to comply with procedural rules and evidentiary standards.
-
The court recommended granting default judgment, awarding statutory damages and costs, and issuing a permanent injunction against the defendant for trademark infringement and false designation of origin.
-
The court granted in part and deferred in part the plaintiff's motion for injunctive relief, issuing a temporary restraining order against the defendant.
-
The court granted Plaintiff's motion for final default judgment, permanently enjoining Defendants from infringing Plaintiff's trademarks and ordering the transfer of the offending domain name.
-
The court held that good cause exists to grant the plaintiff's motion for leave to serve a third-party subpoena on Chase Bank before the Rule 26(f) conference.
-
The court held that plaintiffs failed to establish irreparable injury, a prerequisite for a temporary restraining order.
-
The court granted Plaintiff's motion for default judgment, finding that Defendant infringed Plaintiff's copyright and violated the DMCA by removing copyright management information.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a permanent injunction because it relied on the wrong legal standard and was premature.
-
The court denied the motion for a temporary restraining order because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the necessary emergency circumstances for proceeding without notice to the defendants. The court deferred consideration of a preliminary injunction pending service and respon
-
The Magistrate Judge recommended denying Defendant's motion to dissolve the TRO as moot because it expired by operation of law, and denying Plaintiff's motion to extend the TRO because it also expired and further extension would require treating it as a preliminary injunction, wh
-
The court adopts the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant default judgment and enter a permanent injunction against the defaulting defendants.
-
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff had adequate alternative remedies under 8 U.S.C. § 1503 and an ongoing related case in California. Consequently, the plaintiff's claims under the APA and for mandamus were dismissed, and his request f
-
The court recommended granting the plaintiff's ex parte motion for a preliminary injunction, including asset restraints, due to strong evidence of design patent infringement by the defendants.
-
The court recommended denial of the plaintiff's motions for temporary restraining orders because he failed to meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1) regarding immediate and irreparable injury and proper notice certification.
-
The court denied the motion for a temporary restraining order because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the necessity of proceeding without notice to the defendant.
-
The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting the plaintiff's motion for entry of final judgment by default.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-29
The court held that the plaintiff failed to meet the requirements for injunctive relief and did not properly initiate a civil action.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction should be denied because they failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and unduly delayed in seeking relief.
-
The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from using the TRUMP trademarks on counterfeit goods and requiring various third parties to assist in enforcing the injunction.
-
The court held that the pro se prisoner's complaint was procedurally deficient and dismissed it without prejudice, but granted the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and allowed an opportunity to amend.
-
The court held that a prisoner's transfer moots her claim for injunctive relief related to the prior institution.
-
The court granted the parties' joint motion to resolve the preliminary injunction, issuing an order based on their agreed-upon terms.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction because they failed to meet procedural requirements and lacked proper notice to the opposing parties.
-
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies, and therefore denied the motion for preliminary injunction and dismissed the action.
-
The court recommended granting Plaintiff's motion for default judgment and a permanent injunction against defaulting defendants for patent infringement.
-
The court recommended granting the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, including asset restraint, due to strong evidence of copyright infringement by defendants who failed to appear or respond.