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

• Thigpen v. United States Parole Comm'n
  707 F.2d 973· 7th Cir.· 1983-05-26 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The Parole Commission has the authority to withdraw an executed parole violator warrant and hold it in abeyance pending the outcome of related state criminal charges, even after a constitutionally infirm revocation hearing has occurred.
• Ronald W. Kitzinger and Delores v. Kitzinger
  432 So. 2d 188· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-05-25 ·cited 12×·via Mandatory Injunction
  Gulf Power Company sought a mandatory injunction to remove a corner of the Kitzingers' house that encroached 18.06 feet into Gulf Power's electrical transmission line easement acquired in 1926. The circuit court denied the injunction but imposed an unliquidated lien on the homest
• Itek Corp. v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Boston
  704 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1983-03-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a subsequent Treasury regulation, which barred final judicial judgments disposing of Iranian interests in standby letters of credit, applied to the district court's judgment even though it was rendered before the regulation's amendment, requiring the judgment
• Chesler v. Hyman B. Hendler
  428 So. 2d 730· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-03-16 ·cited 12×
  This case involves appeals from non-final orders in a complex corporate litigation. The appellate court reviewed orders related to a temporary injunction, appointment of a receiver, dismissal of a complaint, and disqualification of counsel, ultimately affirming the dissolution of
• Donovan v. Fall River Foundry Co., Inc.
  696 F.2d 524· 7th Cir.· 1982-12-27 ·cited 12×
  A party appealing an order to submit to a government health inspection is not automatically entitled to a stay under Rule 62(d) upon filing a supersedeas bond.
• Farmhand, Inc. v. Anel Eng'g Indus., Inc.
  693 F.2d 1140· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding the patent valid and infringed, and that the defendant was not in contempt of the injunction.
• SAN Francisco Real Est. Invs. v. Real Est. Inv. Tr. OF Am.
  692 F.2d 814· 1st Cir.· 1982-11-09 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A district court's temporary restraining order extending a tender offer's proration date is improper and appealable if it functions as a preliminary injunction.
• The Better Bus. Bureau OF Metro. Houston, Inc. v. Med. Directors, Inc.
  681 F.2d 397· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-29 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that while the district court correctly found the advertisements misleading and likely to cause confusion, the preliminary injunction was overly broad in its prohibition of any mention of the Better Business Bureau. The injunction was modified to allow such mention
• Mich. Sav. & Loan League v. Francis
  683 F.2d 957· 6th Cir.· 1982-07-08 ·cited 12×
• James River Flood Control Ass'n v. Watt
  680 F.2d 543· 8th Cir.· 1982-06-17 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court granted the stay pending appeal of the preliminary injunction because the appellants met the required burden, and the balance of equities favored the United States.
• NEW York City Health & Hosps. Corp. v. Blum
  678 F.2d 392· 2d Cir.· 1982-05-04 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court dismissed the interlocutory appeal because the certified question was not ripe for review, as the district court had not definitively ruled on the merits of the standing or the alleged conflict with the PSRO Act, and the issue might be moot.
• In the Matter of: William S. Ellis, Jr. v. Corey
  674 F.2d 1238· 9th Cir.· 1982-04-19 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the March 1971 conveyance of the Silversword Inn was a mortgage, not a sale, and reversed the bankruptcy court's judgment to the contrary. The court also vacated a writ of assistance based on that judgment and dismissed a third appeal as moot.
• Dep't OF Energy v. Honorable Clarence A. Brimmer
  673 F.2d 1287· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1982-03-03 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court's order granting a preliminary injunction was appealable as a final order and that the injunction was an abuse of discretion, vacating the order and remanding for dismissal.
• Knight v. The Shoshone & Arapahoe Indian Tribes of the Wind River Reservation
  670 F.2d 900· 10th Cir.· 1982-02-08 ·cited 12×
  Indian tribes possess inherent sovereign power to regulate land use by non-Indians on fee lands within reservation boundaries, and their zoning ordinance was a valid exercise of this power.
• Marathon OIL Co. v. Mobil Corp.
  669 F.2d 378· 6th Cir.· 1981-12-23 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not err in issuing a preliminary injunction blocking Mobil's proposed acquisition of Marathon under Section 7 of the Clayton Act.
• Douglas W. Wohlfahrt, M.D. v. Mem'l Med. Ctr.
  658 F.2d 416· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-08 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The denial of a preliminary injunction is affirmed, but the dismissal of the action is vacated and remanded because the district court improperly considered the merits without sufficient notice to the plaintiff.
• Gen. Motors Corp. v. Marshall
  654 F.2d 294· 4th Cir.· 1981-07-17 ·cited 12×·via Action For Injunction
  The court held that the agency should have been permitted to remand the cases for reconsideration of disclosure decisions in light of Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, as the prior administrative decisions were based on unclear law and the agency requested a review under new guidelines.
• ST. Michael's Convalescent Hosp. v. The State OF Cal.
  643 F.2d 1369· 9th Cir.· 1981-05-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that state agencies administering Medi-Cal are not federal agencies subject to FOIA or the Privacy Act, and that the appellants, as entities, lack standing under the Privacy Act. However, the court remanded the issue of whether disclosure of cost information infrin
• Lyons v. King
  397 So. 2d 964· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-04-15 ·cited 12×
  Prospective condominium purchasers appealed a trial court judgment upholding a condominium association's rejection of their purchase application. The association had contractual authority to approve or disapprove purchasers and, upon disapproval, provide an alternative purchaser
• Mondy v. Mondy
  395 So. 2d 193· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-02-13 ·cited 12×·via Petition For Injunction
  Father appeals trial court's award of temporary custody to Mother in a child custody dispute where Father removed children from Alabama to Idaho and Mother subsequently removed them to Florida. The court affirms, holding that Florida has jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custo
• Chevron Chem. Co. v. Costle
  641 F.2d 104· 3d Cir.· 1981-02-04 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that Chevron does not possess a property right in the test data submitted to the EPA, either under federal law or state law, that would prevent the agency from using such data internally for registration purposes.
• The Flipside v. Vill. OF Hoffman Ests.
  639 F.2d 373· 7th Cir.· 1981-01-12 ·cited 12×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that the ordinance is unconstitutionally vague because it fails to provide clear notice of what items are regulated, violating the due process clause.
• Oliver v. Kalamazoo Bd. OF Educ.
  640 F.2d 782· 6th Cir.· 1980-12-15 ·cited 12×
  The court vacated the district court's order regarding funding and remanded for further proceedings, but the dissenting judge argued against the remand and the appointment of experts.
• Fla. JAI Alai, Inc. v. S. Catering Servs., Inc.
  388 So. 2d 1076· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-09-24 ·cited 12×·via Permanent Injunction
  Florida Jai Alai, Inc. appeals a final judgment in a breach of concession agreement dispute with Southern Catering Services, Inc. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's findings regarding past disputes and monetary relief but reversed the permanent injunction against term
• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. PSL Realty Co.
  630 F.2d 515· 7th Cir.· 1980-09-12 ·cited 12×
  The district court did not err in issuing an injunction to prevent state courts from interfering with its jurisdiction over property in foreclosure proceedings.
• In re MacOn Uplands Venture v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
  624 F.2d 26· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-13 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the district court's injunction against the debtor but dismissed the appeal of other issues as premature or not properly before the court.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Falstaff Brewing Corp. & Paul Kalmanovitz
  629 F.2d 62· D.C. Cir.· 1980-05-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Kalmanovitz could be held liable under Section 14(a) for permitting his name to be used in a misleading proxy solicitation, and that both Falstaff and Kalmanovitz violated Section 13(a) reporting requirements and Section 10(b) by engaging in deceptive practice
• Robert M. v. Benton
  622 F.2d 370· 8th Cir.· 1980-05-23 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that it lacked clear jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 because the district court's order was not a final judgment, but might have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) if the order is construed as an injunction.
• Punnett v. Carter
  621 F.2d 578· 3d Cir.· 1980-05-13 ·cited 12×·via Mandatory Injunction
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm.
• Platt v. Pietras
  382 So. 2d 414· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-04-09 ·cited 12×
  Platt, a leaseholder of cattle grazing land, appealed a judgment enjoining him from trespassing on neighboring property owners' lots and blocking platted roads with fencing. The court affirmed, holding that Platt could not acquire a prescriptive right to graze cattle over the ent
• United States v. Cnty. OF Humboldt
  615 F.2d 1260· 9th Cir.· 1980-04-01 ·cited 12×
  A county cannot enforce its zoning and building codes against Indian trust property within a reservation, as Public Law 280 does not grant such jurisdiction.
• In re Lloyd
  614 F.2d 17· 1st Cir.· 1980-01-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that it lacked appellate jurisdiction to review the interlocutory order modifying an injunction because it was entered in a 'controversy arising in a proceeding in bankruptcy,' or alternatively, was a 'trivial order' in a 'proceeding.'
• United States v. An article of drug consisting of the following: 15866/50-Tablet Bottles
  602 F.2d 1387· 10th Cir.· 1979-08-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in determining X-Otag Plus to be a 'new drug' for condemnation and injunction purposes without an administrative record, but remanded the destruction order for the district court to consider staying destruction.
• City OF Pompano Beach v. BIG Daddy's, Inc.
  375 So. 2d 281· Fla.· 1979-07-12 ·cited 12×
  A municipality may reasonably regulate the hours of alcoholic beverage sales without establishing 'good cause' through a formal hearing, as such regulations are within the police power if related to public health, safety, welfare, and morals.
• Goldberg v. Simoni
  601 F.2d 653· 2d Cir.· 1979-06-28 ·cited 12×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the district court's abstention order, which stayed proceedings pending state court determination of state law issues, is appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) as a denial of a temporary injunction.
• Amchem Prods., Inc. v. GAF Corp. & Douglas M. Costle
  594 F.2d 470· 5th Cir.· 1979-05-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the amendments to FIFRA requiring compensation for the use of scientific test data were effective upon enactment of FEPCA, not upon the promulgation of implementing regulations.
• City OF Boca Raton v. Boca Villas Corp.
  371 So. 2d 154· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-04-18 ·cited 12×
  The City of Boca Raton challenged a trial court judgment striking down its charter amendment that capped residential dwelling units at 40,000 and implementing density-reduction ordinances. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the cap and ordinances violated due process beca
• Herschensohn v. Hoffman
  593 F.2d 893· 9th Cir.· 1979-03-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the patent claims were invalid for obviousness and lack of synergistic results, and that the accused device did not infringe. Furthermore, no valid injunction was in effect to support a contempt judgment.
• Solien v. United Steelworkers of Am.
  593 F.2d 82· 8th Cir.· 1979-02-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying injunctive relief because there was reasonable cause to believe the Union's consumer boycott activities constituted an unlawful secondary boycott under the NLRA, despite the district court's finding of no coercion.
• Union Elec. Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency
  593 F.2d 299· 8th Cir.· 1979-02-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that federal courts should not interfere with the pre-enforcement procedures established by the Clean Air Act, and thus, an injunction preventing EPA enforcement proceedings was improper.
• Am. Mar. Ass'n v. Blumenthal
  590 F.2d 1156· D.C. Cir.· 1978-11-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the transport of Alaskan crude oil from Valdez to the Virgin Islands for refining, and the subsequent transport of refined products to the continental United States, does not violate the Jones Act because the Virgin Islands are excluded from U.S. coastwise law
• City OF Tampa v. Islands Four, Inc.
  364 So. 2d 738· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-09-27 ·cited 12×
  The City of Tampa denied Islands Four's application to renew its public dance hall license based on noise ordinance violations. The trial court found the city acted arbitrarily and capriciously and awarded damages. The appellate court reversed, holding that sufficient competent e
• Oakwood Manor, Inc. v. ECK
  358 So. 2d 585· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-05-10 ·cited 12×·via Wrongful Injunction
  Oakwood Manor appeals a judgment denying damages on an injunction bond posted by S & E Enterprises when S & E obtained a temporary injunction against Oakwood in 1971. The court reverses and remands, holding that the dismissal of S & E's underlying suit does not automatically esta
• M & M Leasing Corp. v. Seattle First Nat'l Bank
  563 F.2d 1377· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-04 ·cited 12×
  National banks may engage in long-term lease financing where they recover their investment through rental payments, but short-term lease financing, which requires banks to dispose of used chattels, is not part of the business of banking.
• Wright v. Cade
  349 So. 2d 833· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-09-16 ·cited 12×·via Mandatory Injunction
  A beverage license is a property right that may be validly encumbered by a covenant to reassign, and statutory transfers under Section 561.32(1), Florida Statutes, do not vest title in the transferee but merely inform the Beverage Department of the holder's identity. Halifax Fina
• United States v. McBRIDE
  560 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1977-06-20 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  A federal prisoner cannot use 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to challenge a pre-guideline sentence based on the Parole Commission's subsequent application of new guidelines that frustrate the sentencing judge's expectations. The Parole Commission's authority to alter policies does not render a
• Paradise Shores Apts., Inc. v. Practical Maint. Co., Inc.
  344 So. 2d 299· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-04-06 ·cited 12×
  Paradise Shores Apartments sought to dismiss a class action suit filed by Practical Maintenance Co. for breach of a maintenance contract and interference with contractual relations. The court reversed the lower court's denial of the motions to dismiss, finding that the complaint
• Dugan v. City OF Jacksonville
  343 So. 2d 103· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-03-11 ·cited 12×
  Appellant, a property owner and Zoning Board member, challenged Jacksonville's denial of his request to rezone his corner lot from residential to the least intensive commercial (CPO) classification. The trial court rejected his application despite uncontradicted evidence that the
• Canadian Transp. Co. v. Irving Tr. Co.
  548 F.2d 53· 2d Cir.· 1977-01-17 ·cited 12×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court was justified in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff had not met the tests for such an injunction and there appeared to be an adequate remedy at law.
• Palm Corp. v. 183RD St. Theatre Corp.
  344 So. 2d 252· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-01-11 ·cited 12×
  Palm Corporation, a landlord, appealed a circuit court order enjoining its county court eviction action against its tenant, 183rd Street Theatre Corporation. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to enjoin the county cou