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
-
Fla. 2d DCA·
2021-06-16
This case involves an appeal of a trial court's injunction. The appellate court reversed one part of the injunction for being overbroad but affirmed the rest.
-
Fla. 2d DCA·
2021-06-16
This case involves an appeal of a trial court's injunction. The appellate court found one paragraph of the injunction to be overbroad and reversed that specific part, while affirming the rest of the injunction.
-
The trial court erred in concluding that physicians did not violate a nonsolicitation provision prohibiting treatment of former patients of Tampa Pain Relief Center during a twenty-four-month restricted period without written consent, where evidence showed the doctors treated 644
-
This appellate court dismissed an appeal concerning a temporary injunction as moot because a subsequent judgment rendered the injunction unnecessary. The court also dismissed a challenge to proceedings supplementary for lack of jurisdiction.
-
The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision that had issued a temporary injunction prohibiting enforcement of statutory regulations governing medical marijuana treatment centers, finding that the company Florigrown failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of s
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-06-02
The court approved the security and value, directed the issuance of a monition and injunction, and ordered publication of notice for the limitation of liability action.
-
The court held that the defendant was in civil contempt for violating a permanent injunction by preparing tax returns for others, but that the recommended punitive fine was improper without sufficient due process.
-
The court granted Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining Defendants from using Plaintiff's trademarks and copyrighted works and restraining their financial accounts.
-
The court held that Florida failed to establish standing to seek a preliminary injunction against federal immigration enforcement policies, as its claimed injuries were speculative and not concrete.
-
The appellate court reversed a domestic violence injunction against Gabriel Swarek because he was not personally served with the petition and notice of hearing, which is required by Florida law for the court to have personal jurisdiction. This decision highlights the strict requi
-
The court recommended granting the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits of their trademark infringement claim and will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.
-
The appellate court reversed and remanded a trial court's decision to extend an ex parte injunction, finding that the trial court failed to demonstrate good cause for the repeated continuances and extensions. The court emphasized that such extensions should be exceptional and tha
-
Outstanding discovery in separate, albeit related, proceedings does not constitute good cause to extend a temporary ex parte domestic violence injunction under Fla. Stat. § 741.30, and repeated continuations over 17 months without a final hearing violate due process rights.
-
The trial court's order denying the petition for a domestic violence injunction is affirmed.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and request for a preliminary injunction were without merit.
-
The court held that a claim for specific performance to compel appraisal is a valid cause of action, but a breach of contract claim must allege general damages, not just consequential damages from delay.
-
The Court granted the motion to set aside the permanent injunction, finding its geographic scope to be overly broad, unreasonable, and not tied to a legitimate business interest, and that the party did not knowingly consent to its terms.
-
The court denied Plaintiff's emergency motion for a preliminary injunction because it failed to comply with local rules for emergency filings and was premature due to lack of service on the defendant.
-
The court denied the application for a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a substantial threat of irreparable injury due to an unexplained, significant delay in seeking enforcement of its trademark rights.
-
The appellate court reversed a temporary injunction that ordered the removal of a boat, finding that the party seeking the injunction failed to present sufficient evidence to support the required legal elements. The case was remanded for an evidentiary hearing.
-
Appellants challenged a trial court's nonfinal order granting a temporary injunction requiring them to remove their boat from a boat lift. The appellate court reversed, finding that appellees failed to present competent, substantial evidence supporting the required elements for i
-
The court granted the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, restraining defendants from selling infringing products and ordering financial institutions to freeze assets associated with the infringement.
-
The court held that the plaintiff inmate failed to meet the requirements for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction and dismissed the case.
-
A temporary restraining order is appropriate under the Lanham Act when a trademark owner demonstrates a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its infringement claim, irreparable injury absent immediate relief, that the threatened injury outweighs harm to the defendan
-
The appellate court affirmed a lower court's decision to revoke probation. The appellant argued he could not violate probation while incarcerated before it began, but the court held that misconduct demonstrating unfitness for probation can lead to revocation even before probation
-
The appellate court dismissed an appeal of a protective order because the order had expired by its own terms. The court found the appeal was moot and did not fit any exceptions to the mootness doctrine.
-
The court held that a non-party cannot join an existing action for permissive joinder or benefit from a preliminary injunction granted to an individual plaintiff who did not represent a class.
-
The appellate court granted prohibition, preventing a trial judge from presiding over three cases involving a party and his counsel. While the judge's filing of a Bar complaint against the party's counsel was not automatically grounds for disqualification, the court found that un
-
The appellate court reversed a lower court's denial of a preliminary injunction, finding that a neighbor's use of a high-powered security camera to surveil a backyard enclosed by a privacy fence could constitute invasion of privacy. The court certified a question of great public
-
A motion to dissolve a domestic violence injunction must allege a change in circumstances to be sufficient.
-
A temporary injunction against former employees and their new employer was properly issued where the former employees violated enforceable restrictive covenants and confidentiality clauses in their employment agreements by soliciting the former employer's agents and policyholders
-
The court granted the parties' joint motion, ordering the plaintiff to deposit insurance proceeds and be discharged from liability, while permanently enjoining defendants from further proceedings against the plaintiff regarding the proceeds.
-
A motion to dissolve a domestic violence injunction must allege a change in circumstances to be sufficient.
-
A motion to dissolve a domestic violence injunction must allege a change in circumstances to be sufficient.
-
The Court granted SPay's motion for a preliminary anti-suit injunction, finding that the forum selection clause in the asset purchase agreement (APA) was enforceable and required both the fraudulent inducement claim and the declaratory judgment claim regarding the Restrictive Cov
-
The court held that the town's ordinance banning portable signs is a content-neutral regulation that does not violate the First Amendment or the Equal Protection Clause, and thus denied the motion for a preliminary injunction.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's ex parte application for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunctive relief.
-
The court denied the plaintiff's motion for injunctive relief and dismissed the case without prejudice.
-
The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from infringing on their trademarks.
-
The court held that Pinnacle was not entitled to recover on the injunction bond because it was not wrongfully enjoined, and granted Pinnacle's motion to transfer the case to the Southern District of Florida.
-
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint seeking injunctive relief was barred by collateral estoppel because the issues were already litigated and decided in a prior arbitration proceeding confirmed by the court.
-
The court granted the motion for a preliminary injunction, adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation, finding the defendant breached contract and misappropriated trade secrets.
-
A mandatory injunction requiring immediate remediation of contamination must be reversed where it fails to describe with reasonable detail the acts required and was issued after an abbreviated hearing without full opportunity for parties to present evidence.
-
A trial court violates a respondent's due process rights by granting an injunction for protection based on objected-to testimony regarding domestic violence allegations that were not included in the petition and thus not properly pleaded.
-
Fla. 4th DCA·
2021-03-03
A circuit court acts reasonably in modifying enforcement of a settlement agreement's visitation rights to comply with gubernatorial executive orders restricting facility access during the COVID-19 pandemic.
-
-
The court granted the plaintiff's motions for default judgment, permanent injunction, restitution, and civil monetary penalties against defendants The Alista Group, LLC and Luis M. Pineda Palacios.
-
A party seeking to dissolve or modify an injunction must demonstrate a change in circumstances such that the scenario underlying the injunction no longer exists and continuation would serve no valid purpose.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits for injunctive relief regarding his detention under either § 1226(a) or § 1231(a).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-02-22
The court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to review the plaintiff's claim, as it constituted an indirect attack on a final removal order.