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 held that the EPA's administrative action to bring CORCO into compliance with environmental laws is exempt from the automatic stay provision of the Bankruptcy Code, as it falls under the exception for governmental units enforcing police or regulatory powers.
-
The court held that the district court improperly modified a preliminary injunction after an appeal was filed, and that the original injunction's provisions regarding patent infringement and unfair competition could not stand due to the design's functionality.
-
The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying a preliminary injunction, as the City's plan to accommodate Hasidic students likely violated the Establishment Clause's 'primary effect' test.
-
The court affirmed the district court's findings on liability for race discrimination and interference claims, but reversed the award of attorney's fees for some appellees.
-
The majority improperly decided the ultimate issue of whether Massey is bound by the arbitration agreement, usurping the district court's role.
-
The court held that a skilled nursing facility failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits or serious questions for litigation to justify a preliminary injunction against the imposition of intermediate sanctions for noncompliance with Medicare participation requir
-
The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion to reopen the case because a past finding of unitariness does not bar renewed litigation of a mandatory injunction, especially when significant changes to a court-ordered plan are alleged.
-
The state may lawfully regulate and tax tribal liquor sales to non-Indians, but the tribes' sovereign immunity bars the state's counterclaim for taxes due, though not the collection of security posted for a preliminary injunction.
-
The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in finding the alien ineligible for asylum due to a conviction for a particularly serious crime, and that the district court erred in granting and refusing to dissolve a preliminary injunction.
-
776 F.2d 1522·
Fed. Cir.·
1985-10-29
·cited 18×
The court held that in patent contempt proceedings, a district court's discretion to determine the scope of relitigation is broad and fact-dependent, and it is not always necessary to re-examine patent claims, prior art, and prosecution history.
-
478 So. 2d 368·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1985-10-11
·cited 18×
Hill Top Developers appeals a judgment for $52,715.88 owed to Holiday Pines Service Corporation for water and sewer plant facility expansion charges. The court reverses, holding that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because utility service charges must first rec
-
774 F.2d 459·
Fed. Cir.·
1985-09-26
·cited 18×
The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding no clear error in its factual determinations regarding damages, willfulness, and contempt.
-
767 F.2d 882·
Fed. Cir.·
1985-07-08
·cited 18×
Denial of a motion for a show cause order and contempt judgment was not an abuse of discretion because there was a fair ground of doubt as to whether the new shredder infringed the patent.
-
760 F.2d 1009·
9th Cir.·
1985-05-17
·cited 18×
The dissenting judge would remand the case to the district court for further fact-finding regarding whether the injunction aspect of the case is moot.
-
749 F.2d 1138·
5th Cir.·
1985-01-07
·cited 18×
The dissenting judge would have affirmed the district court's injunction against pursuing custody claims in Louisiana state court.
-
The court held that the district court erred in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm due to the chilling effect on his First Amendment rights.
-
The court held that the Association's territorial restrictions constitute a horizontal market division that is illegal per se under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, justifying the grant of a preliminary injunction.
-
The court held that the California Civil Rights Act does not permit or require separate but equal accommodations, privileges, or services.
-
455 So. 2d 326·
Fla.·
1984-06-14
·cited 18×
The Florida Supreme Court reviewed the constitutionality of a state fuel excise tax law as applied to foreign airlines. The Court upheld the tax's constitutionality under both the Commerce Clause and federal preemption doctrine, reversing the trial court's finding that an interna
-
The district court erred in dismissing a prisoner's § 1983 action with prejudice based on res judicata, as claims arising after the Ruiz v. Estelle judgment could not have been litigated in that class action.
-
The court affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction ordering the defendant to deliver seed corn, finding no abuse of discretion in granting the injunction.
-
The appellate court vacated the preliminary injunction, holding that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate irreparable injury and that the district court erred in excluding evidence related to the bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) defense. The court also noted that while
-
The court held that while a temporary injunction was proper, its language must be made more specific and relate to the actual activities involved to avoid vagueness and ensure compliance.
-
The court held that the district court erred in denying the National Labor Relations Board's application for a preliminary injunction, finding reasonable cause to believe an unfair labor practice occurred and that an injunction was just and proper.
-
718 F.2d 1137·
D.C. Cir.·
1983-10-04
·cited 18×
The court specially concurred, arguing there is no essential difference between upholding a secrecy agreement for classified information and seeking a prepublication injunction for the same information.
-
Florida appellate court reversed a preliminary injunction preventing a condominium association from repainting a unit's exterior, holding that the trial court failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or inadequate remedy at law required for such extraordinary relief.
-
The court modified a preliminary injunction, upholding certain restrictions on signs used by White House demonstrators while reversing the injunction against parcel placement regulations, balancing First Amendment rights against presidential security.
-
The court held that the district court had jurisdiction under both 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question) and 28 U.S.C. § 1361 (mandamus) to review the Secretary's procedural challenges to Medicare benefit level determinations. It affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction
-
The court held that it lacked appellate jurisdiction over the cross-appeals and vacated the denial of the preliminary injunction, remanding for further proceedings.
-
A potential law school student who procures acceptance through fraudulent misrepresentations does not possess a constitutionally protected property interest in attending the university.
-
The court held that the status quo provision of the Education of the Handicapped Act does not apply when a private school placement was not the 'then current educational placement' agreed to or ordered by a public agency.
-
The court held that the appeal is moot because the OSHA inspection warrant was fully executed and no citations were issued, thus the case has no legal consequence.
-
The court affirmed the grant of a preliminary injunction, holding that the district court did not err in applying Minnesota law to the restrictive covenant and in finding a threat of irreparable harm.
-
Esposito appealed from orders granting and maintaining a preliminary injunction requiring a boat to be held at a boatyard in a dispute with Horning over ownership and a claimed repair contract. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the preliminary injunction
-
544 F. Supp. 1004·
S.D. Fla.·
1982-06-29
·cited 18×
The court held that the INS's policy of detaining Haitian nationals pending admission was adopted in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and ordered their release on parole, while also finding no discrimination based on race or national origin.
-
The court held that the appeal was moot and therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because all underlying disputes had been settled and the parties had released each other.
-
411 So. 2d 1356·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1982-04-06
·cited 18×
An attorney's fee award to a plaintiff in an injunctive relief action cannot be sustained where the case is dismissed for mootness unrelated to the merits, no injunctive relief ever issued, and the defendant raised affirmative defenses including selective enforcement and estoppel
-
State employees seeking a preliminary injunction in a Title VII action after exhausting administrative remedies are presumed to suffer irreparable injury, and the district court erred by requiring them to prove it.
-
The court affirmed the grant of a preliminary injunction, finding no clear abuse of discretion by the district court in preserving the status quo pending trial.
-
The court held that the district court erred in denying compensatory damages for copyright infringement, as some degree of speculation is inherent in calculating lost sales, and remanded for computation of damages.
-
650 F.2d 546·
5th Cir.·
1981-06-25
·cited 18×
The court held that the refusal to enjoin proceedings in the district court is not an appealable interlocutory order, but the refusal to enjoin proceedings in other American courts is appealable and was not an abuse of discretion; mandamus is not proper for challenging the forum
-
399 So. 2d 1068·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1981-06-19
·cited 18×
A mortgage lender foreclosed on property after the developer defaulted, then sued to enjoin enforcement of a downzoning ordinance. The court reversed summary judgment for the lender, holding that equitable estoppel did not apply because the lender failed to establish a detrimenta
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction requiring the underwriters to process insurance claims according to a prior agreement, balancing the severe financial harm to the insured against the minimal harm to the under
-
The court held that the leases and sublease were void due to lack of corporate authorization and misrepresentations, and that the defendants were liable for damages as trespassers. Ancillary jurisdiction was proper.
-
394 So. 2d 568·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1981-03-04
·cited 18×
Tortoise Island Communities appeals from an injunction preventing it from interfering with lot owners' canal easements across its island property. The court affirmed the injunction protecting the easement holders' right of passage but reversed the trial court's blanket prohibitio
-
390 So. 2d 799·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1980-12-02
·cited 18×
Suave Shoe Corporation appeals the trial court's dismissal of its case seeking to enforce a non-competition agreement against former employee Luis Fernandez. The appellate court reverses, holding that the employer established a prima facie case for enforcement under Florida law a
-
The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the appellees failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, particularly concerning the complex Fifth Amendment taking claims and the availability of a Tucker Act remedy.
-
The court held that injunctive relief against the International Union was improper without findings of necessity or helpfulness, and the injunction against the Local Union was overbroad and insufficiently specific. The contempt order against the Local was also improper due to lac
-
The court held that a recipient of federal funds must demonstrate a rational decision-making process when a decision has a disproportionate racial impact under Title VI.
-
The court held that the police's broad, unspecific restrictions on First Amendment activity, based on an outdated order and without individualized assessment, constituted an unlawful prior restraint and violated constitutional rights.