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 accepted and adopted the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, denying the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order.
-
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.
-
Fla. 2d DCA·
2023-05-03
This case involves a dispute over a privacy fence's impact on a neighbor's view of a stormwater pond. The appellate court reversed the trial court's summary judgment, finding that the existing fence complied with the homeowners' association's covenants and architectural guideline
-
The court denied the motion for a temporary restraining order due to multiple procedural deficiencies.
-
The court held that the service-of-suit amendments did not repeal the arbitration clause, and therefore, the dispute must be arbitrated. The court also found no delegation provision in the arbitration clause.
-
The Court grants in part and defers in part Argonaut Insurance Company's motion for civil contempt and sanctions, ordering defendants to show cause why they should not be held in contempt.
-
The court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order, finding a likelihood of success on the breach of contract claim regarding the Denton Franchise Agreement but not on trademark or FDUTPA claims.
-
The court denied a petition for writ of habeas corpus, holding that a parent could be charged with interference with child custody under section 787.03(1), Florida Statutes, even if they retain parental rights. The court found the statute's plain language applied broadly to "whoe
-
The court granted the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining certain defendants from manufacturing, selling, or transferring infringing products and restraining their assets.
-
The court denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction because they failed to demonstrate irreparable injury due to significant delay in seeking the injunction.
-
The court held that Plaintiffs Garcia and Fernández have standing to challenge the in-office lobbying restrictions, but no plaintiff has standing to challenge the post-office restrictions. The Attorney General and Chief Financial Officer are proper defendants.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish Article III standing because they did not allege facts demonstrating an injury-in-fact, specifically that they were able to bid on specific contracts and would face unequal treatment.
-
Fla. 5th DCA·
2023-03-31
-
Fla. 5th DCA·
2023-03-31
A trial court must make factual findings in its order granting a temporary injunction and must require the applicant to post a bond as prescribed by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(b)–(c).
-
-
The Court held that it retains jurisdiction to consider a motion seeking enforcement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 36(b) as a collateral issue, and that the IRS's administrative penalty investigation constitutes a 'proceeding' under Rule 36(b).
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to meet the heightened burden for a mandatory injunction and did not comply with procedural rules.
-
-
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
-
The Superior Court properly denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's declaratory judgment claim, finding that the law of the case doctrine dictated that Delaware was the proper forum. However, the Court of Chancery lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plain
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to grant a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against the defendant for copyright infringement, but denied the request for a preliminary injunction due to improper service.
-
The Court of Chancery found that the Agreement between the parties constituted an enforceable license to use the property, not a contract for the sale of real property, due to a lack of definite terms. The Court further held that the license was revoked by the matriarch in 2001,
-
The court held that Plaintiff demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its trademark infringement claim, justifying a preliminary injunction.
-
The court held that the requested hourly rate for plaintiff's attorney was reasonable and adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation in part, granting default judgment, statutory damages, attorneys' fees, costs, and a permanent injunction.
-
The court granted default judgment as to liability for copyright infringement, but requires an evidentiary hearing to determine damages.
-
The court granted MCINC's application for a preliminary injunction, finding that MCINC is likely to succeed on the merits of its claims for trademark, copyright, and patent infringement and that immediate and irreparable harm would occur if the injunction were not granted.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-03-14
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing the injunction and tortious interference claims but allowing the breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation claims to proceed.
-
The court held that the plaintiff failed to carry his burden to demonstrate entitlement to injunctive relief, and therefore his motions are denied.
-
The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court correctly dismissed the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because the dispute was minor under the Railway Labor Act.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, granting in part the plaintiffs' motion and entering a preliminary injunction against certain defendants.
-
The court granted in part plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order, finding a likelihood of success on the merits for breach of contract and trademark infringement claims.
-
An injunction prohibiting tortious interference with business relationships through use of an irrelevant mugshot and false statements about regulatory license suspension is proper, as these conduct exceed First Amendment protections. However, injunctions broadly restricting the r
-
The court held that plaintiffs René Garcia and Javier Fernández have standing to challenge the in-office lobbying restrictions, but no plaintiff has standing to challenge the post-office restrictions.
-
The court affirmed the injunction prohibiting appellants from using Heath Ritenour's 23-year-old mugshot without permission for commercial purposes and from making false statements regarding IOA's insurance license, as these were narrowly tailored and did not violate the First Am
-
The court granted default judgment for conversion but denied claims for RICO, unjust enrichment, and constructive trust due to lack of adequate remedy at law or insufficient allegations.
-
The court recommended granting Plaintiff's motion for default judgment in part, finding sufficient allegations for copyright infringement and removal of copyright management information, and awarding statutory damages and injunctive relief.
-
-
A trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying a domestic violence injunction when it finds past violence but concludes the violence was too remote in time to establish an objectively reasonable risk of imminent domestic violence.
-
The court held that plaintiffs have established a substantial likelihood of success on their Title IX claim and will suffer irreparable harm, warranting a preliminary injunction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-02-15
The court granted the Petitioner's motion, approving the Letter of Undertaking as adequate security and issuing a monition and injunction to restrain further proceedings.
-
The court granted Plaintiff's ex parte motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), finding a likelihood of patent infringement and irreparable harm, and ordered an injunction, asset restraint, and expedited discovery.
-
This case involved a dispute over a restrictive covenant and trade secrets. The appellate court affirmed most of the lower court's decision but reversed and remanded for a recalculation of damages due to a factual error regarding the timing of an injunction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-02-10
The court granted the claimant's motion to lift the injunction and stay on her state court action, finding her stipulations adequate to protect the vessel owner's limitation rights.
-
The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction to restrain the defendants' assets, preventing them from dissipating or moving assets outside of the United States.
-
The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction.
-
The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for a worldwide asset restraint, finding that the judgment debtors were likely to dissipate or conceal assets, causing irreparable harm.
-
The court denied the motion for a restraining order and preliminary injunction because the movant failed to comply with local rules and substantive requirements for such relief.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motions for emergency protection and a temporary restraining order/injunction.
-
The court granted plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order, finding that they demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their copyright infringement claim and that irreparable harm would occur without immediate relief.
-
The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation in part, finding that the Interested Parties lacked the requisite notice to contest the allegations against them and therefore lacked the likelihood of success on the merits for injunctive relief.