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

• Bankers Ins. Co. v. Fla. Residential Prop. & Cas. Joint Underwriting Ass'n
  689 So. 2d 1127· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-02-25 ·cited 22×·via Temporary Injunction
  Bankers Insurance Company appealed the denial of its request for a temporary injunction against FRPCJUA's decision to select different servicing carriers. The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the denial, holding that Bankers failed to exhaust available administrati
• Gold Coast Chem. Corp. v. Goldberg
  668 So. 2d 326· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-02-21 ·cited 22×·via Temporary Injunction
  Gold Coast Chemical Corporation's appeal of the trial court's denial of a temporary injunction to enforce a non-compete covenant against a former employee was dismissed because Gold Coast failed to demonstrate clear abuse of discretion.
• Ayuda, Inc. v. Thornburgh
  948 F.2d 742· D.C. Cir.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 22×·via Request For Injunction
  The court held that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear claims challenging the INS' administration of IRCA, as such challenges must be brought through the statutory administrative and judicial review process, typically in the courts of appeals.
• Myrtice Jane Hayes v. Hayes
  578 So. 2d 54· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-04-19 ·cited 22×
  A mother appealed an ex parte temporary injunction prohibiting her from removing her child from Polk County to relocate to Maryland for employment. The court reversed, holding that the father's verified petition failed to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610 by not a
• Europco Mgmt. Co. OF Am. v. Smith
  572 So. 2d 963· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-12-17 ·cited 22×·via Mandatory Injunction
  Europco Management Company, developer of Southwind II, appealed dismissal of its action seeking to enforce protective covenants against homeowners who built an unpermitted screen porch addition. The court reversed, holding that Europco established a prima facie case of covenant v
• Frio ICE, S.A. v. Sunfruit, Inc.
  918 F.2d 154· 11th Cir.· 1990-11-30 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  Federal courts have jurisdiction under PACA to entertain injunctive actions by private parties to enforce payment from a statutory trust, and possess the authority to order segregation of trust assets to prevent dissipation.
• Nat'l Org. FOR Women v. Operation Rescue
  914 F.2d 582· 4th Cir.· 1990-09-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendants' blockading of abortion facilities violated 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) by infringing on women's right to travel and affirmed the district court's grant of a permanent injunction.
• Cardenas v. Maria Marta Colomer Caceres de Solis
  570 So. 2d 996· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-09-11 ·cited 22×·via Ex Parte Injunction
  A Florida appellate court upheld a temporary injunction freezing half of a defendant's Miami bank accounts at the request of a Guatemalan family court in a marital property dispute between Guatemalan citizens. The court held that Florida comity principles permit enforcement of ce
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Comserv Corp.
  908 F.2d 1407· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-24 ·cited 22×
  The court held that while the SEC's position was not substantially justified, the prevailing party did not 'incur' attorney fees as required by the EAJA because his fees were paid by a third party (Comserv) and potentially reimbursable by an insurer, thus not serving EAJA's purpo
• Chicago Title Ins. Agency OF LEE Cnty., Inc. v. Chicago Title Ins. Co.
  560 So. 2d 296· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-04-18 ·cited 22×
  Chicago Title Insurance Agency of Lee County appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss and a preliminary mandatory injunction requiring it to cease using the word "Chicago" in its business name. The court reversed the injunction, finding insufficient evidence of irreparable in
• Okaw Drainage Dist. OF Champaign & Douglas Cnty. v. Nat'l Distillers & Chem. Corp.
  882 F.2d 1241· 7th Cir.· 1989-08-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court's denial of an injunction was correct, but the breach of contract claim requires further findings.
• Portland Feminist Women's Health Ctr. v. Advocates FOR Life, Inc.
  859 F.2d 681· 9th Cir.· 1988-10-06 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was not impermissibly vague and did not abridge protected First Amendment rights, though it modified the noise provisions to require substantial interference.
• Caribbean Marine Servs. Co., Inc. v. Baldrige
  844 F.2d 668· 9th Cir.· 1988-04-14 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by granting preliminary injunctions without properly considering irreparable harm to the government and the public interest, and without sufficient findings of irreparable harm to the owners and crew.
• Curtis v. Thompson
  840 F.2d 1291· 7th Cir.· 1988-02-05 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court erred by denying a preliminary injunction without addressing all five required factors, particularly given the constitutional nature of the claims.
• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Dixon
  835 F.2d 554· 5th Cir.· 1987-12-28 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A preliminary injunction freezing assets is permissible to secure equitable remedies like restitution, especially when the public interest is involved and the assets are alleged ill-gotten gains.
• Johnson Chem. Co., Inc. v. Home Care Prods., Inc.
  823 F.2d 28· 2d Cir.· 1987-07-07 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A plaintiff's voluntary dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(i) should not be vacated based solely on the defendant's incurred costs or the shift in bargaining positions, absent the extreme circumstances present in Harvey Aluminum.
• Vaughan Mfg. Co. v. Brikam Int'l, Inc.
  814 F.2d 346· 7th Cir.· 1987-02-25 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting a preliminary injunction for trade dress infringement, finding sufficient evidence of secondary meaning and non-functionality.
• DKT Mem'l Fund, Ltd. v. Agency for Int'l Dev.
  810 F.2d 1236· D.C. Cir.· 1987-02-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the NGOs should be allowed to amend their complaint to affirmatively allege eligibility for AID funds, and that the case does not present a nonjusticiable political question.
• Fresh Int'l Corp. v. Agric. Labor Relations Bd.
  805 F.2d 1353· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court should have abstained from hearing the case under the Younger v. Harris doctrine, requiring dismissal of the federal action in favor of ongoing state proceedings.
• Wheaton Indus. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency
  781 F.2d 354· 3d Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  Judicial review of EPA actions under CERCLA is not available until the EPA files a cost recovery action, and this preclusion also bars review under the Administrative Procedure Act.
• In re Robinson v. McGUIGAN
  776 F.2d 30· 2d Cir.· 1985-10-29 ·cited 22×·via Request For Injunction
  The court held that a criminal restitution obligation is a 'debt' under the Bankruptcy Code and is not automatically excepted from discharge, requiring creditors to file timely objections.
• Fritiofson v. Alexander
  772 F.2d 1225· 5th Cir.· 1985-10-07 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Corps of Engineers did not adequately analyze the cumulative impacts of the development project, but the district court erred in ordering the preparation of an environmental impact statement at that stage.
• Hawley v. City OF Cleveland
  773 F.2d 736· 6th Cir.· 1985-10-03 ·cited 22×
  Taxpayers have standing to challenge a municipal lease of airport space for a chapel if they can demonstrate either non-economic injury from impaired use of the public facility or economic harm to the municipal treasury.
• Olin Water Servs. v. Midland Research Labs., Inc.
  774 F.2d 303· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-02 ·cited 22×·via Injunction Bond
  The appeal from the preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot because the injunctions have expired and the issues are not preserved for appeal, requiring a trial on the merits.
• Marathon Mfg. Co. v. Enerlite Prods. Corp.
  767 F.2d 214· 5th Cir.· 1985-08-05 ·cited 22×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that the district court's finding of a likelihood of confusion between Enerlite's "MARATHON 10" mark and Marathon Manufacturing Company's "MARATHON" trademark was not clearly erroneous, supporting the issuance of a permanent injunction.
• Frazier v. The Bd. OF Trs. OF Nw. Miss. Reg'l Med. Ctr.
  765 F.2d 1278· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that Lifetron's personnel decisions were not state action for purposes of a § 1983 claim, but reversed the dismissal of the § 504 Rehabilitation Act claim, finding Lifetron was a program benefiting from federal financial assistance.
• Lepucki v. VAN Wormer
  765 F.2d 86· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-04 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's imposition of costs and fees against attorney John A. Hyde for filing frivolous claims and abusing the judicial process.
• In re DeLOREAN Motor Co. v. John Z. DeLOREAN (83-1802)
  755 F.2d 1223· 6th Cir.· 1985-02-27 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that a bankruptcy court's order to escrow sale proceeds, intended to preserve assets for investigation, was a valid preliminary injunction under 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 65, not an attachment governed by state law.
• Reuben Palmer v. City OF Chicago
  755 F.2d 560· 7th Cir.· 1985-02-15 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the plaintiffs have standing to seek preliminary injunctive relief to preserve evidence, and that principles of comity and the Younger doctrine do not bar such relief.
• Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc. v. Much
  754 F.2d 773· 7th Cir.· 1985-02-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that an order vacating and remanding only the damages portion of an arbitration award is not a final judgment appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 because it requires more than ministerial action and does not moot the issues on appeal. The court also held that the ord
• The Moorings Ass'n, Inc. v. Tortoise Island Cmtys., Inc.
  460 So. 2d 961· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-12-13 ·cited 22×
  The Moorings Association appealed a dismissal of its complaint alleging an implied easement across an island to access the Banana River. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the complaint sufficiently alleged an easement by implication based on the developer'
• La. World Exposition, Inc. v. Logue
  746 F.2d 1033· 5th Cir.· 1984-11-05 ·cited 22×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that a "minute order" making a preliminary injunction permanent satisfied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, granting appellate jurisdiction, and that the district court's finding of likelihood of confusion was not clearly erroneous.
• Ramirez-Osorio v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  745 F.2d 937· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-23 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the dissent's arguments regarding prior injunctions and due process were not properly before the court on appeal.
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Warner Commc'ns Inc.
  742 F.2d 1156· 9th Cir.· 1984-09-13 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court erred in applying an incorrect legal standard and improperly relying on Bureau of Economics memoranda, and that preliminary injunctive relief is warranted to block the proposed joint venture.
• Freixenet, S.A. v. Admiral Wine & Liquor Co.
  731 F.2d 148· 3d Cir.· 1984-03-28 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding no clear error in the district court's determination of dissimilar labels and lack of consumer confusion. The appeal from the partial summary judgment was dismissed as not a final order.
• Gen. Fin. Corp. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  700 F.2d 366· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-10 ·cited 22×
  A suit to enjoin an FTC investigation is premature and barred if a specific statutory method for judicial review, such as subpoena enforcement, exists and is adequate.
• Mikos v. King's Gate Club, Inc.
  426 So. 2d 74· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-02-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that members of King's Gate Mobile Home Park, who maintain proprietary interests in park sites through membership in a nonprofit corporation that owns the fee simple property, are owners of land for purposes of real property taxation under Florida law. Mobile homes
• Action Elec. & Repair, Inc. v. Batelli
  416 So. 2d 888· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-07-14 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  Action Electric sought review of a preliminary injunction that froze its assets pending resolution of a breach of promissory note claim. The court held that injunctive relief cannot be used as a substitute for attachment in a simple damages action for breach of contract, and vaca
• Beltran v. Beverlee A. Myers
  677 F.2d 1317· 9th Cir.· 1982-05-25 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction against California's transfer of assets rule for medical assistance eligibility, finding it likely preempted by federal law.
• Sentry Ins. v. Dunn
  411 So. 2d 336· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-03-24 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to enter a preliminary injunction to enforce a non-compete agreement, as irreparable injury may be presumed in such cases.
• DeLISI v. Smith
  401 So. 2d 925· Fla. 2d DCA· 1981-07-29 ·cited 22×·via Ex Parte Injunction
  A party seeking to sustain an ex parte temporary injunction in a RICO forfeiture action bears the burden of proving sufficient facts at the first hearing directed to the propriety of the order, requiring prima facie proof that the restrained property was used in, intended for, de
• Morrissey v. Curran
  650 F.2d 1267· 2d Cir.· 1981-04-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that union officers' fiduciary duties under LMRDA § 501 are not excused by membership authorization if the expenditure is personally beneficial and manifestly unreasonable. The court also clarified the applicable fiduciary standard and addressed specific claims reg
• Scott v. Moore
  640 F.2d 708· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-26 ·cited 22×·via Labor Dispute Injunctions
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act does not divest federal courts of jurisdiction to enjoin violent acts, even in a labor dispute, and that 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) provides a remedy for private conspiracies motivated by nonracial, class-based animus that deprive individuals
• Societe Generale de Surveillance, S.A. v. Raytheon European Mgmt. & Sys. Co.
  643 F.2d 863· 1st Cir.· 1981-02-25 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the Federal Arbitration Act applies, but the district court had the authority to enjoin arbitration in Massachusetts. The court affirmed the district court's decision that Change Order No. 8 was part of the Basic Contract, and that the dispute should be resolv
• Ciechon v. City OF Chicago
  634 F.2d 1055· 7th Cir.· 1980-11-20 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the Due Process Clause does not require a full hearing prior to the suspension of public employees for violation of a residency ordinance, as long as a prompt post-suspension hearing is assured.
• In re Becker's Motor Transp., Inc. v. Dep't OF the Treas.
  632 F.2d 242· 3d Cir.· 1980-09-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that bankruptcy courts lack jurisdiction to enjoin IRS tax collection efforts but can issue declaratory relief. It also held that the IRS is equitably estopped from collecting pre-petition interest due to misleading conduct, but not from collecting pre-petition pen
• Leffler v. Smith
  388 So. 2d 261· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-08-27 ·cited 22×
  Meredith Enterprises and Paul Leffler appealed a judgment declaring that property owners in a residential development held a recreational easement over two lakefront lots. The court affirmed, holding that the defendants were estopped from denying the easement rights that had been
• Cook v. The Birmingham News
  618 F.2d 1149· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-13 ·cited 22×·via Modification Of Injunction
  The district court lacked jurisdiction to clarify a consent decree that did not have prospective effect, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5).
• Adoption HOT Line, Inc. v. State
  385 So. 2d 682· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-06-10 ·cited 22×·via Temporary Injunction
  A trial court properly exercises its discretion in granting a temporary injunction against an allegedly unlicensed child-placing agency where there is a demonstrated probability of irreparable injury to the public from potential black-market baby placements and improper child pla
• Geiger v. City OF Eagan
  618 F.2d 26· 8th Cir.· 1980-03-19 ·cited 22×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague on its face because it failed to provide fair notice of what was prohibited and lacked standards for enforcement.