5,622 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 6,126 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The court affirmed the granting of a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiff had a better than negligible chance of establishing trademark rights in 'CHOCOLATE FUDGE' for diet soda and that the balance of harms and public interest favored the injunction.
-
The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the claim regarding the EDCO/COED route and Concord switching assignment for lack of jurisdiction, as it constituted a collateral attack on an ICC order exempting the transaction from RLA requirements.
-
The court held that the administrative law judge's decision denying Social Security benefits was supported by substantial evidence and that the ALJ did not err in evaluating the claimant's physical and mental impairments or his ability to return to past relevant work.
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction under the All-Writs Act to prevent state actions that threatened to impair its jurisdiction over a complex, advanced securities class action and its settlement proceedings.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in granting a preliminary injunction against the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) for approving projects without complying with the Compact's requirements for environmental threshold findings.
-
The court held that it had jurisdiction to review the interlocutory order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) and exercised pendent jurisdiction over related summary judgment issues. The grant of partial summary judgment and dissolution of a preliminary restraint were vacated, while the
-
745 F.2d 370·
6th Cir.·
1984-10-04
·cited 30×
The court held that the railroad's discontinuation of 'checking in and out' pay was arguably sanctioned by the collective bargaining agreements, thus constituting a minor dispute within the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Railroad Adjustment Board, not a major dispute subj
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the preliminary injunction because 'Software News' is likely a generic term, unprotectable as a trademark, and plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits.
-
A city is immune from antitrust liability under the Parker doctrine when it acts pursuant to a clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed state policy to displace competition with regulation, even if the state does not actively supervise the city's actions.
-
The majority opinion is flawed in holding that the use of the word 'lust' in defining prurient interest renders a statute facially overbroad under the First Amendment.
-
724 F.2d 352·
2d Cir.·
1983-12-23
·cited 30×
The court held that the district court did not err in fashioning a limited injunction but did err in failing to consider the plaintiff's claims for an accounting, attorneys' fees, and false advertising.
-
The court held that the denial of a preliminary injunction was not an abuse of discretion, and an appeal of that denial does not bring up for review prior interlocutory orders dismissing a conspiracy claim and denying class certification.
-
718 F.2d 299·
9th Cir.·
1983-10-12
·cited 30×
The court held that the appeal was not moot and affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction, finding it struck an appropriate balance between treaty fishing rights and conservation needs.
-
717 F.2d 352·
7th Cir.·
1983-08-26
·cited 30×
The court held that Henri's Yogowhip does not infringe Kraft's Miracle Whip trademark because there is no likelihood of confusion among consumers, and affirmed the district court's denial of injunctive relief and cancellation of trademark applications.
-
435 So. 2d 868·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1983-07-05
·cited 30×
Residents of Miami Shores Village challenged the Village's approval of an Archdiocese plan to construct a Pastoral Center on property zoned for single-family residential use, claiming the primarily administrative building violated local zoning restrictions. The Third District Cou
-
The court affirmed the district court's grant of a preliminary injunction, finding no abuse of discretion in its consideration of the factors for injunctive relief.
-
The court held that the newspaper's change to an agency distribution system, based on legitimate business justifications and producing no unreasonable anticompetitive effects, did not violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
-
The court held that the district court abused its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate irreparable injury, a favorable balance of hardships, or a lack of adverse impact on the public interest.
-
417 So. 2d 1035·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1982-07-14
·cited 30×
Hensel appeals a mandatory injunction requiring removal of building encroachments on an easement claimed by Aurilio. The court reverses, holding that Aurilio's easement was not legally created and that even if valid, Aurilio is barred from enforcing it through equitable doctrines
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying abstention and granting a preliminary injunction against Nevada's dairy price filing scheme, finding a high probability of success on the merits of the antitrust claims.
-
A charge of reprisal filed by a federal employee does not provide a path to judicial review under Title VII; however, the district court must rule on a motion for a preliminary injunction.
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to grant a preliminary injunction against the operation of new HEW regulations.
-
655 F.2d 905·
9th Cir.·
1980-03-28
·cited 30×
The court held that the Provider Reimbursement Review Board's decision was not supported by substantial evidence and that the acquisition transaction constituted a purchase of an ongoing facility for Medicare reimbursement purposes.
-
The district court did not err in denying the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction because the teachers failed to establish a constitutional right to a teaching position in a particular location.
-
The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the McDonald class's motion to intervene as untimely, and that the McDonald class was not adequately represented by the State or FOP.
-
The court held that a showing of discriminatory purpose is not required for a Title VII violation, and that the district court erred in its findings regarding the job-relatedness of promotional examinations and the adequacy of validation studies.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the preliminary injunction because the plaintiff was unlikely to prevail on the merits of his due process claim.
-
The court held that the district court erred in granting interim injunctive relief because the plaintiffs failed to establish a probability of success on the merits.
-
The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the University had not shown a strong probability of success on the merits.
-
The court held that an indefinite continuance of a preliminary injunction hearing is appealable as a refusal of an injunction, and that dismissal of a complaint with prejudice is a final, appealable order. The court also found that the cases were not moot despite the strike endin
-
The court held that the equitable doctrine of laches barred the plaintiffs' environmental claims because of their unreasonable and inexcusable delay, which resulted in undue prejudice to the defendants due to substantial investment and project completion.
-
The appeal is dismissed as moot because the underlying criminal investigation has concluded with convictions, and the challenged police practices are unlikely to recur and affect the original litigants.
-
The court held that the amended complaint failed to state a cause of action for injunctive relief because it did not sufficiently allege irreparable harm.
-
An uncertified labor organization does not have an express or implied right to maintain an action under the Railway Labor Act, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction.
-
The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in entering the preliminary injunction.
-
330 So. 2d 561·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1976-04-20
·cited 30×
The court held that while a temporary injunction preventing an insurance rate increase was properly granted, the trial court erred in ordering the impaneling of a special board to hear evidence, as this exceeded its procedural and statutory authority.
-
328 So. 2d 499·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1976-03-02
·cited 30×
Appellant Slatko challenges the trial court's order striking his complaint as a sham in a partnership dispute. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the complaint was not palpably false and that genuine issues of fact remained to be tried.
-
The court held that a seniority system, while generally valid, cannot be used to perpetuate past discrimination, and relief is available to those who prove they were improperly denied rightful placement in the seniority hierarchy due to discrimination.
-
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief because the Economic Stabilization Program had expired, and the exceptions to the expiration did not apply to the facts presented.
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the unions failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits and unduly delayed in invoking available arbitration remedies.
-
The court held that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the New Melones Dam project was adequate under NEPA, and affirmed the district court's judgment denying injunctive relief.
-
484 F.2d 952·
4th Cir.·
1973-09-28
·cited 30×
The court held that the appeal is moot because the testimony sought to be enjoined has already been received, and incidental relief to enjoin future use of the information is inappropriate.
-
The court held that subject matter jurisdiction was proper and the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction and appointing a receiver.
-
The court held that probationary professors alleging First Amendment violations for non-renewal must exhaust prospective state administrative remedies if those remedies are fair and adequate, and that the California State College System's grievance procedure met this standard.
-
461 F.2d 674·
10th Cir.·
1972-06-01
·cited 30×
The court held that the Supreme Court's prior decision determined present ownership of the riverbed, and that the district court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the boundary dispute between the Cherokee and Choctaw tribes without congressional authorization.
-
The court held that the district court's order limiting the scope of injunctive relief sought by the plaintiff is not immediately appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).
-
447 F.2d 80·
9th Cir.·
1971-08-17
·cited 30×
The court held that a prudent person would have foreseen the increased market demand for construction materials due to the creation of Big Bear Lake.
-
Appellants Crossen and Craddock have standing and presented a case or controversy; appellant Pozzuto and the Women's Liberation Group lack standing. A three-judge court must be convened for the remaining appellants.
-
The court held that preliminary injunctions must comply with procedural rules regarding notice and hearing, and that injunctions should be narrowly tailored. It also found that an association was improperly dismissed as a party.
-
The court held that a federal court cannot review the grading of bar examination papers or grant injunctive relief for alleged grading errors or discrimination, as such matters must first be addressed by the state's highest court.