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

• Alderwoods Grp., Inc. v. Reyvis Garcia
  119 So. 3d 497· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-07-31 ·cited 13×·via Mandatory Injunction
  Alderwoods Group, Inc. and related cemetery operators appeal a trial court's order certifying a class action lawsuit brought by families unable to locate their relatives' graves at Graceland Memorial Park South Cemetery. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed the class certi
• Ivana Alter v. Paquette
  98 So. 3d 218· Fla. 2d DCA· 2012-09-28 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the evidence did not support a finding of two incidents of repeat violence as defined by statute, thus reversing the injunction.
• Barile v. Gayheart
  80 So. 3d 1085· Fla. 2d DCA· 2012-02-17 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial court erred by switching the type of injunction from repeat violence to domestic violence sua sponte without proper notice, thereby denying the appellant due process.
• Elur J. Raymonvil v. Sade Ferrari Lewis
  46 So. 3d 139· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-10-22 ·cited 13×·via Modification Of Injunction
  Trial court violated due process by summarily denying without hearing a motion to modify a domestic violence injunction where the movant alleged changed circumstances and a prior agreement limiting the injunction's duration.
• Jaffe v. Bank of Am., N.A.
  667 F. Supp. 2d 1299· S.D. Fla.· 2009-08-28 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove his claims against the bank for negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, and equitable estoppel, as the evidence did not support his allegations of oral assurances contrary to the written letter of credit.
• MacIer v. In re Est. OF Bessie Giamportone
  972 So. 2d 1017· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-01-09 ·cited 13×
• Randolph v. Antioch Farms Feed & Grain Corp.
  903 So. 2d 384· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-06-17 ·cited 13×·via Temporary Injunction
  Appellants Randolph appealed from a temporary injunction order granted in favor of Antioch Farms Feed & Grain Corp. and Tony Sills. The appellate court affirmed the injunction but remanded for the trial court to enter proper factual findings and set an appropriate bond, as requir
• Charlotte Cnty. v. Richard Vetter for the Charlotte Cnty. Park of Commerce, LLC
  863 So. 2d 465· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-01-21 ·cited 13×·via Permanent Injunction
  Charlotte County challenges a preliminary injunction requiring it to approve subdivision and site plan applications for an industrial park near the county airport. The court affirms the preliminary injunction to the extent it requires the county to expeditiously process permit ap
• Mitchel Kalmanson v. Lockett
  848 So. 2d 374· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-05-23 ·cited 13×
  Mitchel Kalmanson sued Judge Jerry T. Lockett for damages and injunctive relief based on alleged threats and verbal orders issued by the judge via telephone after the judge had recused himself from Kalmanson's dissolution of marriage case. The court affirmed the dismissal based o
• Orange Lake Country Club, Inc. v. Levin
  645 So. 2d 60· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-11-04 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial court erred in entering a judgment based on a hearing that did not comply with procedural rules for summary judgment or injunctions, and that a jury trial was improperly denied.
• Diginet v. W. Union ATS
  958 F.2d 1388· 7th Cir.· 1992-03-09 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court should certify issues of state law to the Illinois Supreme Court rather than deciding them itself.
• Woodrum v. Woodrum
  590 So. 2d 1093· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-12-24 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the injunction preventing the husband from disposing of any assets without the wife's consent was overbroad and unreasonably restricted his livelihood.
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Univ. Health, Inc.
  938 F.2d 1206· 11th Cir.· 1991-07-26 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that Section 7 of the Clayton Act applies to asset acquisitions by nonprofit hospitals and that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits. Th
• Terex Trailer Corp. v. McILWAIN
  579 So. 2d 237· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-04-29 ·cited 13×
  Terex Trailer and K-H Corporation appealed an order granting partial summary judgment requiring them to pay McIlwain his full compensation and benefits during the pendency of an employment termination dispute. The court affirmed, holding that the employment contract's express pro
• Artist M. v. Johnson
  917 F.2d 980· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-29 ·cited 13×
  The 'reasonable efforts' clause of the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 is too ambiguous to create an enforceable right under the Act or § 1983.
• State v. Dodd
  561 So. 2d 263· Fla.· 1990-05-08 ·cited 13×
  The Florida Supreme Court struck down a statute prohibiting candidates for statewide and legislative office from accepting or soliciting campaign contributions during legislative sessions, finding it violated First Amendment free speech and associational rights. The Court held th
• Gen. Elec. Co. v. NEW York State Dep't OF Labor
  891 F.2d 25· 2d Cir.· 1989-11-29 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The dissent argues that New York's prevailing wage law is not preempted by ERISA because it regulates labor costs and only incidentally affects employee benefit plans.
• Wendy's Int'l, Inc. v. The City OF Birmingham
  868 F.2d 433· 11th Cir.· 1989-03-24 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the landowners' suit did not present a justiciable controversy because no actual taking of property or palpable threat of condemnation had occurred, making the dispute too speculative for federal court jurisdiction.
• Webster v. Sowders
  846 F.2d 1032· 6th Cir.· 1988-05-18 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that interim attorney fees and expert monitor costs awarded without findings on liability are not appealable interlocutorily and must be reversed and remanded. The court also held that a district court cannot impose Rule 11 sanctions for filing an appeal.
• Lewellen v. Raff
  843 F.2d 1103· 8th Cir.· 1988-04-04 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting a preliminary injunction against the state criminal prosecution, but erred in denying absolute prosecutorial immunity for claims arising from electronic surveillance.
• China Trade & Dev. Corp. v. M.V. Choong Yong
  837 F.2d 33· 2d Cir.· 1987-12-31 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by issuing an anti-suit injunction against foreign litigation, as the Korean action posed no threat to the district court's jurisdiction or important public policies of the forum.
• Wagner v. Reese H. Taylor, Jr.
  836 F.2d 566· D.C. Cir.· 1987-12-24 ·cited 13×·via Action For Injunction
  Federal district courts have jurisdiction to grant interim injunctive relief against retaliation for federal employees under Title VII, but the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the injunction in this case.
• United States v. Dedra Estell Overton
  834 F.2d 1171· 5th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding the balance of harms weighed against granting it due to the timing.
• Calvin Klein Cosmetics Corp. v. Parfums de Coeur, Ltd.
  824 F.2d 665· 8th Cir.· 1987-07-29 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying most of Calvin Klein's motions for preliminary injunctions, but vacated an overbroad injunction paragraph.
• United States v. Ianniello
  824 F.2d 203· 2d Cir.· 1987-07-21 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in appointing a receiver for Umberto's Clam House and in assessing the costs of the receivership against the government pending trial.
• Madrigal Audio Labs., Inc. v. Cello, Ltd.
  799 F.2d 814· 2d Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that an individual who sells the right to use his personal name as a trade name is not barred from advertising his affiliation with a competing company, provided there is no false designation of origin or likelihood of consumer confusion.
• THE Florida BAR v. Mel Levine
  486 So. 2d 547· Fla.· 1986-02-20 ·cited 13×·via Permanent Injunction
• Mar-Len OF La., Inc. v. Parsons-Gilbane
  773 F.2d 633· 5th Cir.· 1985-10-11 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the dispute regarding the validity of contract modifications obtained under alleged economic duress is subject to the arbitration agreement's broad scope.
• Maxim's Ltd. v. Badonsky
  772 F.2d 388· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-12 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the denial of a preliminary injunction was not an abuse of discretion because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a clear probability of success on the merits and the balance of harms did not sufficiently favor the plaintiff.
• Ry. Labor Executives Ass'n & J. Jay Stull v. Dole
  760 F.2d 1021· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-17 ·cited 13×
  The court held that plaintiffs lacked standing to compel agency enforcement of railroad safety statutes and that agency decisions not to prosecute are generally unreviewable.
• Hamker v. Diamond Shamrock Chem. Co.
  756 F.2d 392· 5th Cir.· 1985-04-01 ·cited 13×
  A citizen suit under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act requires an allegation that the defendant is currently in violation of an effluent standard, limitation, or order, and does not permit suits for past violations or to recover damages.
• City OF Alexandria v. Helms
  728 F.2d 643· 4th Cir.· 1984-02-28 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The district court lacked jurisdiction to issue a preliminary injunction because the FAA's decision to authorize a temporary flight pattern test constituted a final order reviewable exclusively by the Courts of Appeals, and the National Environmental Policy Act did not provide an
• Biscayne Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Fed. Home Loan Bank Bd. & Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp.
  720 F.2d 1499· 11th Cir.· 1983-11-29 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court lacked the authority to remove the FSLIC as receiver or order the return of assets because the statutory grounds for appointment were met, and judicial review is limited to determining the existence of those grounds.
• Am. Motors Sales Corp. v. Runke
  708 F.2d 202· 6th Cir.· 1983-05-10 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act does not prohibit enjoining state administrative proceedings and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction due to a conflict between state and federal law, but the injunction was overly br
• LeBEAU v. Spirito
  703 F.2d 639· 1st Cir.· 1983-03-28 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits regarding the adequacy of AFDC benefit reduction notices.
• Godheim v. City OF Tampa
  426 So. 2d 1084· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-01-28 ·cited 13×
  A Tampa taxpayer challenged the city's contract award to Waste Management for a solid waste facility, alleging violations of competitive bidding requirements, state consulting acts, and the Sunshine Law. The court affirmed dismissal, holding that the taxpayer lacked standing to s
• Rush Pettway v. Am. Cast Iron Pipe Co.
  681 F.2d 1259· 11th Cir.· 1982-07-15 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial court erred in ordering individual-by-individual back pay determinations, as it failed to give proper consideration to class-wide relief and improperly shifted the burden of proof to the employees.
• Inez Wright v. Regan
  656 F.2d 820· D.C. Cir.· 1981-06-18 ·cited 13×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish standing because they did not allege a concrete and direct injury resulting from the IRS's tax exemption policies for discriminatory schools.
• City OF Fort Pierce v. Davis
  400 So. 2d 1242· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-06-03 ·cited 13×
  The City of Fort Pierce appealed a trial court judgment that equitably estopped the city from rezoning appellees' commercial property to residential. The appellate court held that while the rezoning ordinance was void for inadequate notice, equitable estoppel did not apply becaus
• Gilley v. United States
  649 F.2d 449· 6th Cir.· 1981-05-27 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that a tenured federal employee seeking to enjoin a transfer pending administrative appeal must meet stringent standards for irreparable harm, and that the claimed inconveniences and difficulties in pursuing an appeal do not constitute irreparable injury sufficient
• Lacks v. Fahmi
  623 F.2d 254· 2d Cir.· 1980-06-16 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel because the issue of appropriate relief had been fully litigated and settled in prior state court proceedings.
• Hollingsworth Solderless Terminal Co. v. Turley
  622 F.2d 1324· 9th Cir.· 1980-06-02 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted for most claims, as contradictory inferences could be drawn regarding the confidentiality of customer information and unfair competition. The denial of a preliminary injunction was also vacated for reconsideration.
• Merrill Lynch v. Nat'l Ass'n OF Sec. Dealers, Inc.
  616 F.2d 1363· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-16 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the NASD's procedural ruling was not immediately reviewable and Merrill Lynch failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Barndollar v. Sunset Realty Corp.
  379 So. 2d 1278· Fla.· 1979-12-06 ·cited 13×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a trial court's injunction against a referendum on the Gasparilla Island Historic and Conservation District Act, finding the statute unconstitutional on multiple grounds: inadequate pre-enactment notice, improper expansion of voting eligibility to
• Al-Kim, Inc. v. The United States
  650 F.2d 944· 9th Cir.· 1979-10-11 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  Third parties whose property is levied upon to satisfy another's tax liability cannot contest the merits of the tax assessment under 26 U.S.C. § 6213, but may seek relief under 26 U.S.C. § 7426 if the levy was wrongful.
• Carr v. Herschell Saucier
  582 F.2d 14· 5th Cir.· 1978-10-11 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the mootness issue, which was not presented to the district court, requires a factual determination and thus the case must be remanded.
• Washington v. Walker
  529 F.2d 1062· 7th Cir.· 1976-02-04 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm, or an inadequate legal remedy, and that the balance of hardships did not favor granting the injunction.
• Shannon v. United States
  521 F.2d 56· 9th Cir.· 1975-07-29 ·cited 13×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to enjoin the IRS levy against a transferee because the transferee was assessed the tax and could not challenge the assessment's validity under 26 U.S.C. § 7426, nor did she meet the stringent requirements for an exceptio
• Meis v. Sanitas Serv. Corp.
  511 F.2d 655· 5th Cir.· 1975-04-18 ·cited 13×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the trial court did not err in issuing a temporary injunction to preserve the status quo pending trial, as the plaintiffs made a sufficient prima facie showing of potential success on the merits and the injunction was properly molded to the circumstances.
• Town OF Hialeah Gardens v. Hebraica Cmty. Ctr., Inc.
  309 So. 2d 212· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-03-11 ·cited 13×·via Suit For Injunction
  The Town of Hialeah Gardens appealed a trial court's order granting a petition for writ of certiorari that directed the town to rezone property for a community center club complex. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court improperly ordered rezoning based on the