Injunction

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

• Berkley Multi-Units, Inc. v. Linder
  464 So. 2d 1356· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-03-20 ·cited 29×
  A notice of lis pendens is not maintainable as a matter of right in an action seeking rescission of a deed based on fraud.
• In re Hunt v. Hunt
  754 F.2d 1290· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-15 ·cited 29×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the contempt issue was moot due to purging and that the injunction barred further litigation of relinquished claims.
• Supreme Serv. Station Corp. v. Telecredit Serv. Ctr., Inc.
  424 So. 2d 844· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-11-23 ·cited 29×·via Temporary Injunction
• Martin-Marietta Corp. v. Bendix Corp.
  690 F.2d 558· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-22 ·cited 29×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act and abstention doctrines do not bar federal injunctive relief, and the Michigan Take-Over Offers Act's enforcement provisions unconstitutionally burden interstate commerce.
• Donovan v. Burger King Corp.
  672 F.2d 221· 1st Cir.· 1982-02-22 ·cited 29×
  The court held that assistant managers earning at least $250/week have management as their primary duty and are not exempt from FLSA overtime pay, but that the injunction against Burger King was overly broad in its geographic scope.
• S. Monorail Co. v. Robbins & Myers, Inc.
  666 F.2d 185· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 29×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the threatened harm to the movant did not outweigh the harm to the non-movant.
• Cmty. Commc'ns Co., Inc. v. City OF Boulder
  660 F.2d 1370· 10th Cir.· 1981-09-22 ·cited 29×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the City's districting ordinance for cable operators raises substantial First Amendment issues and that the district court erred in granting a broad preliminary injunction to the cable company. The court modified the injunction to preserve the status quo pendi
• DOE v. Aldo Colautti
  592 F.2d 704· 3d Cir.· 1979-02-08 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff was unlikely to succeed on the merits of his claims under the Rehabilitation Act and the Equal Protection Clause.
• Hardin v. The Houston Chronicle Publ'g Co.
  572 F.2d 1106· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-11 ·cited 29×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying preliminary injunctions because the plaintiffs failed to show irreparable injury.
• Panther Pumps & Equip. Co., Inc. v. Hydrocraft, Inc.
  566 F.2d 8· 7th Cir.· 1977-11-01 ·cited 29×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that the SPRAYMATE B pump is a colorable imitation and equivalent of the infringing SPRAYMATE pump, and thus its manufacture and sale by Universal, Beck's alter ego, violated the injunction. The court also held that Beck and Universal should have been substituted a
• Manhart v. City OF LOS Angeles
  553 F.2d 581· 9th Cir.· 1976-11-23 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the pension plan's higher contribution requirement for women, based on presumed longevity, constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under the Equal Pay Act, distinguishing it from prior Supreme Court rulings on disability benefits.
• Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesell-Schaft v. Rickard
  492 F.2d 474· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-10 ·cited 29×·via Overbroad Injunction
  The court held that the district court's findings of trademark infringement and unfair competition were supported by substantial evidence, but modified the injunctive decree to remove overbroad restrictions.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Cont'l Tobacco Co. OF S.C., Inc.
  463 F.2d 137· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-02 ·cited 29×·via Permanent Injunction
• Vernitron Corp. & Am. Med. Instrument Corp. v. Benjamin
  440 F.2d 105· 2d Cir.· 1971-03-05 ·cited 29×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A federal court injunction staying a state court action is not warranted merely because the state court's factual determinations might have collateral estoppel effect in a federal court with exclusive jurisdiction.
• Sellers v. The Regents OF the Univ. OF Cal.
  432 F.2d 493· 9th Cir.· 1970-09-17 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the complaint, refusing to convene a three-judge court, as there was no genuine threat of irreparable harm or chilling effect on First Amendment rights to warrant injunctive relief.
• Edwards v. Selective Serv. Local Bd. NO. 111
  432 F.2d 287· 5th Cir.· 1970-09-15 ·cited 29×
• Simons v. Vinson
  394 F.2d 732· 5th Cir.· 1968-05-03 ·cited 29×·via Action For Injunction
  The court held that sovereign immunity should not be permitted to nullify a mandatory constitutional command and that the United States Courts should be open to allow appellants to prove their ownership of property.
• English v. Mary B. Hecht & the N. Forty Corp.
  189 So. 2d 366· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-08-09 ·cited 29×
  Plaintiff appeals the dismissal of her equity suit for failure to timely file an amended complaint due to her attorney's miscalculation of the deadline. The court reverses, finding the trial court abused its discretion in denying relief under the mistake/excusable neglect standar
• Wilson v. Hillsborough Cnty. Aviation Auth.
  138 So. 2d 65· Fla.· 1962-02-14 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a statute creating the Hillsborough County Aviation Authority against constitutional challenges. The court held that the statute's provisions allowing the Authority to request tax levies and limiting county commissioners' budget review authority d
• Gwin v. City OF Tallahassee
  132 So. 2d 273· Fla.· 1961-07-26 ·cited 29×
  Municipally owned public utility property held and used for municipal purposes is exempt from ad valorem taxation by another county, even when located outside the municipality's territorial boundaries. The 1957 amendments adding the phrase 'used exclusively for municipal purposes
• A. & P. Food Stores, Inc. v. Kornstein
  121 So. 2d 701· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-06-20 ·cited 29×
  A&P Food Stores appeals from a permanent injunction and $7,500 damages award for alleged nuisance caused by its supermarket operations adjacent to the Kornsteins' residential property. The court affirmed the injunction in principle but found it overbroad and reversed the damages
• Stagg Shop OF Miami, Inc. v. Moss
  120 So. 2d 39· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-04-29 ·cited 29×·via Permanent Injunction
  Stagg Shop of Miami, Inc. and Stagg Shop of Coral Gables, Inc. sought to enjoin Albert Moss and Maurice Moss from using the name "Stagg Ltd." for their West Palm Beach men's clothing store. The court affirmed dismissal of the complaint, holding that without proof of actual custom
• Norfolk & Portsmouth Belt Line R.R. Co. v. Brotherhood OF Railroad Trainmen
  248 F.2d 34· 4th Cir.· 1957-08-23 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the dispute over establishing a new reporting point was a 'minor dispute' under the Railway Labor Act, subject to the National Railroad Adjustment Board, and therefore a strike was enjoinable.
• King v. Seamon
  59 So.2d 859· Fla.· 1952-07-08 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Florida Railroad & Public Utilities Commission (Commission) lacks the authority to conduct a hearing on whether "usual and customary telephone service" should be discontinued due to unlawful use before the service is actually disconnected.
• Town of Palm Beach v. City of W. Palm Beach
  55 So. 2d 566· Fla.· 1951-12-11 ·cited 29×
  The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed a lower court's decision upholding the constitutionality of the Palm Beaches Sanitary District Bill. The bill created a sanitary district encompassing two municipalities to address sewage and pollution issues, and the court found that its pro
• Henderson v. Gay
  49 So. 2d 325· Fla.· 1950-12-15 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a taxpayer seeking to challenge the comptroller's interpretation of a tax law must sue in Leon County, where the comptroller resides, unless the comptroller waives this venue privilege or property seizure has begun. This decision clarifies venu
• Local Union No. 519 v. Robertson
  44 So. 2d 899· Fla.· 1950-03-03 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed an injunction against a union's peaceful picketing. The court held that picketing to force an employer into a closed-shop agreement, which violates state public policy and could subject the employer to penalties, is for an unlawful object and th
• Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Dunnell
  172 F.2d 649· 9th Cir.· 1949-01-11 ·cited 29×
  The dissenting judge argues that the appellee's trademark should be registered and an injunction against its use should not be granted due to lack of competition and likelihood of confusion.
• Sun Pub. Co. v. Walling
  140 F.2d 445· 6th Cir.· 1944-01-24 ·cited 29×
  The court held that while the Fair Labor Standards Act applies to newspaper publishers, an injunction barring them from distributing their newspapers in interstate commerce to compel compliance is an unconstitutional prior restraint on the press.
• Lee v. Beach Publ'g Co.
  127 Fla. 600· Fla.· 1937-03-29 ·cited 29×·via Mandatory Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a permanent injunction requiring Miami's police department to allow a newspaper's reporters and photographers to gather news and inspect police records in accordance with the city charter, while preserving the department's ability to protect leg
• Douglas v. Webber
  99 Fla. 755· Fla.· 1930-04-08 ·cited 29×·via Action For Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a lower court decree invalidating a local legislative act relating to Marion County Highway Bonds on the ground that the required notice of the proposed local legislation was not properly published and established in the legislature as mandated
• Fla. Cent. & Peninsular R.R. Co. v. The Ocala St. & Suburban R.R. Co.
  39 Fla. 306· Fla.· 1897-01-01 ·cited 29×
  Florida Central and Peninsular Railroad Company sought to enjoin Ocala Street and Suburban Railroad Company from operating tracks on an abandoned portion of Magnolia Street in Ocala. The Florida Supreme Court held that a municipal corporation lacks authority to grant exclusive pe
• Fla. Dep't of Health v. Florigrown, LLC
  317 So. 3d 1101· Fla.· 2021-05-27 ·cited 28×·via Temporary Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed an appellate decision upholding a temporary injunction that blocked enforcement of medical marijuana licensing requirements, holding that Florigrown failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its constitutional ch
• Jonjuan Salon, Inc. v. Acosta
  922 So. 2d 1081· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-03-22 ·cited 28×·via Temporary Injunction
  The appellate court held that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion for a temporary injunction because the plaintiff likely established a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
• Granoff v. Seidle
  915 So. 2d 674· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-10-21 ·cited 28×
  In this property dispute between neighboring landowners, the court determined that the Granoffs, not the Seidles, were the prevailing party entitled to recover costs under Florida Statute section 57.041. The Granoffs successfully protected their property rights by obtaining judic
• Young v. Shelitha Kay Smith
  901 So. 2d 372· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-05-11 ·cited 28×·via Domestic Violence Injunction
  Leon Young challenges a final domestic violence injunction entered against him by the trial court. The appellate court reversed, finding that the petitioner failed to prove the required elements of domestic violence or reasonable fear of imminent danger at the evidentiary hearing
• Hagan v. State
  853 So. 2d 595· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-09-05 ·cited 28×
  Hagan was convicted of indirect criminal contempt for violating a domestic violence protection order. The appellate court reversed because the conviction was procured through multiple due process violations, including an insufficient affidavit, failure to transcribe the hearing,
• State v. Wheeler
  745 So. 2d 1094· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-11-24 ·cited 28×·via Domestic Violence Injunction
  A trial court lacks authority to dismiss a criminal charge based on the victim's decision not to pursue prosecution or the court's belief that dismissal serves the interests of justice. Only the state attorney possesses the discretion to determine whether prosecution will continu
• Deepwater Invs. v. Jackson Hole SKI Corp. & Paul M. McCollister
  938 F.2d 1105· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-10 ·cited 28×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact did not exist, and summary judgment for the defendant was proper.
• Sandstrom v. Sandstrom
  565 So. 2d 914· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-08-29 ·cited 28×·via Temporary Injunction
  A husband appeals a temporary injunction restraining him from selling or disposing of marital assets during divorce proceedings. The Florida appellate court affirmed the injunction, holding that Section 61.11 authorizes courts to enjoin dissipation of marital assets before final
• Korn v. Ambassador Homes, Inc.
  546 So. 2d 756· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-07-11 ·cited 28×·via Temporary Injunction
  Court affirmed temporary injunction freezing assets pending arbitration of constructive trust claim, holding that injunction is proper to preserve the res when dissipation is probable and success on the merits is reasonably likely.
• Westland Skating Ctr., Inc. v. GUS MacHado Buick, Inc.
  542 So. 2d 959· Fla.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 28×·via Mandatory Injunction
  Florida Supreme Court adopts the reasonable use rule for surface water interference disputes, replacing strict common enemy and civil law doctrines. The court reverses the Third District's decision applying the strict civil law rule and remands for a new trial, holding that reaso
• In re Fredeman Litig. Dixie Carriers, Inc. v. Channel Fueling Serv., Inc.
  843 F.2d 821· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-15 ·cited 28×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A preliminary injunction freezing a defendant's assets unrelated to the underlying litigation is generally impermissible under federal equitable principles and is not authorized by the RICO statute for private plaintiffs seeking damages.
• Alva Gutierrez v. Mun. Court OF the Se. Jud. Dist.
  838 F.2d 1031· 9th Cir.· 1988-01-27 ·cited 28×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction against an English-only rule, finding a likelihood of success on the merits under Title VII and the possibility of irreparable injury. It also held that the judges were not ent
• Nat'l Ry. Labor Conf. v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers
  830 F.2d 741· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-21 ·cited 28×·via Status Quo Injunction
  The court held that the district court correctly determined the disputes were "minor" under the Railway Labor Act, properly enjoined strikes, and that the conditions placed on the injunction to maintain the status quo were appropriate to preserve the adjustment board's jurisdicti
• Nat'l Fed'n OF Fed. Emps. v. Caspar W. Weinberger
  818 F.2d 935· D.C. Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 28×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that federal district courts have subject matter jurisdiction to hear challenges to mandatory drug testing programs for federal employees, and that prospective injunctive relief is not barred by the availability of a damages remedy.
• SAN Diego Comm. Against Registration & THE Draft (Card) v. The Governing Bd. OF the Grossmont Union High Sch. Dist.
  790 F.2d 1471· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-06 ·cited 28×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the school newspapers constitute a limited public forum, and the Board's exclusion of CARD's anti-draft advertisement, while permitting military recruitment advertisements, constituted viewpoint-based discrimination violating the First Amendment.
• Prof'l Plan Exam'rs OF NEW Jersey, Inc. v. Lefante
  750 F.2d 282· 3d Cir.· 1984-12-20 ·cited 28×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court erred by extending restraints without proper findings and by improperly abstaining from deciding federal constitutional and antitrust claims.
• Ciba-Geigy Corp. v. Bolar Pharm. Co., Inc.
  747 F.2d 844· 3d Cir.· 1984-11-02 ·cited 28×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of a permanent injunction, finding that Bolar's imitation of CIBA's APRESAZIDE trade dress violated both New Jersey unfair competition law and the federal Lanham Act.
• Allegheny Cnty. Sanitary Auth. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency (EPA)
  732 F.2d 1167· 3d Cir.· 1984-04-20 ·cited 28×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A state agency and its officials cannot be sued in federal court for alleged violations of state law, and the Water Pollution Control Act does not create a federal right of action against them. The Act also preempts claims against the EPA under the Administrative Procedure Act.