Injunction

5,622 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 6,125 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Angus Brown v. Neeb
  644 F.2d 551· 6th Cir.· 1981-03-03 ·cited 60×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court affirmed the preliminary injunction prohibiting layoffs that would reduce the proportion of minority firefighters, based on the district court's authority to modify the consent decree due to changed circumstances.
• DOE v. Bailey Marshall
  622 F.2d 118· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-21 ·cited 60×·via Injunction Bond
  A case is moot if the student has graduated and the suit sought only injunctive relief, even if attorneys' fees are requested. However, the mootness does not preclude a determination of attorneys' fees if the plaintiff is a prevailing party.
• Adams v. Cyrus Vance
  570 F.2d 950· D.C. Cir.· 1978-01-17 ·cited 60×·via Mandatory Injunction
  The court held that the district court's order compelling the Secretary of State to object to an International Whaling Commission action was an abuse of discretion, as it would cause substantial injury to U.S. foreign policy and conservation efforts.
• Nat'l Ass'n OF Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO v. Sombrotto
  449 F.2d 915· 2d Cir.· 1971-09-28 ·cited 60×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that reversing a denial of preliminary injunctive relief in a labor dispute, especially after a supervening event like a national agreement, is an extraordinary and potentially inappropriate action for an appellate court.
• Build OF Buffalo, Inc. v. Sedita
  441 F.2d 284· 2d Cir.· 1971-04-13 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the dismissal of the Mayor and Police Commissioner was an interlocutory order refusing an injunction, thus reviewable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).
• Ideal TOY Corp. v. Fab-Lu Ltd. (Inc.) & David Faber
  360 F.2d 1021· 2d Cir.· 1966-05-23 ·cited 60×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction for copyright infringement, finding no abuse of discretion by the lower court.
• United States v. NEW York
  276 F.2d 525· D.C. Cir.· 1959-11-02 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the dismissal of the sixth count of the stockholders' complaint, which sought to enjoin the performance of a contract, was not a final judgment and therefore not immediately appealable as such, nor was it an appealable interlocutory order refusing an injunctio
• Brewer v. Hoxie Sch. Dist. NO. 46 OF Lawrence Cnty.
  238 F.2d 91· 8th Cir.· 1956-10-25 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the federal district court had jurisdiction to issue an injunction against individuals and organizations conspiring to obstruct the desegregation of public schools, as the action arose under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
• Moore v. City Dry Cleaners Laundry
  41 So. 2d 865· Fla.· 1949-07-26 ·cited 60×
  This case involves a union's picketing and associated activities against a laundry business. The court affirmed most of the injunction against the union due to violence and intimidation but reversed a portion that broadly prohibited advertising or discussing the strike, citing fr
• Crandon v. Hazlett
  157 Fla. 574· Fla.· 1946-05-31 ·cited 60×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision striking down Chapter 23053 of the 1945 Florida Acts as unconstitutional. The statute attempted to restructure governance of county detention homes in counties with populations exceeding 260,000 by abolishing the existing Co
• Kelly v. Dowd
  140 F.2d 81· 7th Cir.· 1944-01-31 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the District Court properly dismissed the petitioner's habeas corpus petition and injunction request because federal courts should not interfere with state judicial and administrative processes unless exceptional circumstances exist.
• Kotick v. Durrant
  143 Fla. 386· Fla.· 1940-06-18 ·cited 60×
  This case involves a dispute over an easement for ingress and egress. The court affirmed a lower court's decision permanently enjoining defendants from obstructing the plaintiffs' easement and ordering the removal of obstacles, upholding the validity and scope of the easement as
• Boykin v. Town of River Junction
  124 Fla. 827· Fla.· 1936-07-17 ·cited 60×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the validity of $43,000 in revenue certificates issued by the Town of River Junction to finance additions to its electric utility system, holding that such special revenue certificates may be issued without voter approval when the proceeds are rei
• In re CNX GAS Corp. S'holders Litig. Consol. C.A. No. 5377-VCL
  Del. Ch.· 2010-07-05 ·cited 59×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The Court grants the defendants' application for interlocutory appeal of the Injunction Decision. The Court finds that the defendants have standing to appeal because the decision's analysis of the standard of review constitutes a collateral adverse ruling that will govern the cas
• Belmont v. Belmont
  761 So. 2d 406· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-05-12 ·cited 59×·via Domestic Violence Injunction
  In this Florida dissolution of marriage case, the court affirmed in part and reversed in part the trial court's equitable distribution and alimony award. The key issues involved attorney's fees allocation, the classification of a premarital home as marital property, commingled as
• Konover Realty Assocs., Ltd. v. Mladen
  511 So. 2d 705· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-08-18 ·cited 59×
  In a contract dispute over a hotel purchase, the trial court ordered sellers to deposit $500,000 (the buyer's deposit) into the court registry pending resolution of the case. The appellate court reversed, holding that Florida law does not permit courts to order deposit of funds i
• Am. Civil Liberties Union OF Ill. v. City OF ST. Charles & Fred T.L. Norris
  794 F.2d 265· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-06 ·cited 59×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the prominent display of a Latin cross on a public building during Christmas, even if part of a larger display, likely violates the Establishment Clause because it signifies governmental support for Christianity and is not a traditional Christmas symbol.
• Moody v. Amoco OIL Co.
  734 F.2d 1200· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-14 ·cited 59×·via Preliminary Injunction
• Usaco Coal Co. v. Carbomin Energy, Inc.
  689 F.2d 94· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-27 ·cited 59×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that a district court has the power to issue a preliminary injunction to preserve assets for potential restitution based on a breach of fiduciary duty, even if the defendants argue state law remedies are adequate.
• Gen. Motors Corp. v. Buha
  623 F.2d 455· 6th Cir.· 1980-06-16 ·cited 59×·via Action For Injunction
  Benefits under an ERISA-covered pension plan are not subject to garnishment by a creditor of a plan beneficiary, and federal courts may enjoin such garnishments under ERISA's express authorization exception to the anti-injunction act.
• Town Court Nursing Ctr., Inc. v. Beal
  586 F.2d 266· 3d Cir.· 1978-09-29 ·cited 59×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to consider the nursing home's due process claim regarding termination of its Medicare provider agreement, even without full exhaustion of administrative remedies, due to the colorable nature of the constitutional claim.
• Sys. Operations, Inc. v. Sci. Games Dev. Corp.
  555 F.2d 1131· 3d Cir.· 1977-05-03 ·cited 59×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court erred in placing the burden of proving falsity on the defendant and in failing to require a security bond, thus reversing the preliminary injunction.
• Urbain v. Knapp Bros. Mfg. Co.
  217 F.2d 810· 6th Cir.· 1954-12-01 ·cited 59×
  The court should not have granted a preliminary injunction without sufficient evidence to establish material facts and without requiring security from the appellee.
• State v. Sullivan
  157 Fla. 496· Fla.· 1946-05-28 ·cited 59×
  The Florida Supreme Court vacated a contempt conviction against attorney Vincent C. Giblin for filing an affidavit containing accusations against a circuit judge. The Court held that while certain statements in the affidavit may have been contemptuous, due process required that G
• LEE v. Thos. B. Dowda & JOE C. Jenkins as citizens & taxpayers
  155 Fla. 68· Fla.· 1944-10-31 ·cited 59×·via Mandatory Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Section 14 of the 1943 General Appropriation Bill, which prescribed accounting classifications for state disbursements, was unconstitutional as a violation of Article III, Section 30 of the Florida Constitution, which prohibits appropriation la
• The Richter Jewelry Co., Inc. v. Schweinert
  125 Fla. 199· Fla.· 1935-12-19 ·cited 59×
  In this evenly divided court, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court decree canceling a loan agreement and returning a pledged bracelet, despite three justices believing the decree should be reversed. The case involves whether a $300 fee charged to secure a loan, combin
• Taylor v. Taylor
  130 So. 713· Fla.· 1930-10-27 ·cited 59×
  The appellate court reversed a lower court's decision to sustain a demurrer for multifariousness. The court held that a bill of complaint uniting claims for divorce, alimony, and property disputes arising from the marriage is not multifarious if it promotes judicial economy and c
• THE Florida BAR v. Germain
  957 So. 2d 613· Fla.· 2007-05-17 ·cited 58×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a referee's disciplinary recommendation against attorney Mark F. Germain for multiple ethical violations, including filing frivolous petitions, making false statements under oath, and making disparaging remarks about opposing parties and judges.
• Ferrero v. Associated Materials Inc.
  923 F.2d 1441· 11th Cir.· 1991-02-01 ·cited 58×·via Injunction Bond
  The court held that the new Georgia statute permitting reformation of covenants not to compete applies retroactively and that the preliminary injunction was properly granted under federal procedural standards.
• Brotherhood OF Maintenance OF WAY Employees v. Burlington N. R.R. Co.
  802 F.2d 1016· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-01 ·cited 58×
  The court held that post-incident drug testing is a minor dispute, while post-furlough testing is a major dispute under the Railway Labor Act.
• Lynch v. Dukakis
  719 F.2d 504· 1st Cir.· 1983-10-12 ·cited 58×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction, holding that Title IV-E of the Social Security Act is enforceable through a Section 1983 action and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in fashioning the relief granted.
• Belo Broad. Corp. v. Clark
  654 F.2d 423· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-28 ·cited 58×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that neither the First Amendment nor the common law grants the press a right to copy and broadcast audiotapes admitted as exhibits in a criminal trial when doing so could prejudice a pending trial.
• Lundgrin v. Claytor
  619 F.2d 61· 10th Cir.· 1980-04-08 ·cited 58×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of his breach of contract claim regarding his enlistment agreement.
• United States Postal Serv. v. Brennan
  579 F.2d 188· 2d Cir.· 1978-06-07 ·cited 58×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The dissenting judge holds that the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) should have been permitted to intervene as of right in the litigation. The judge would reverse the judgment denying intervention.
• Helene Curtis Indus., Inc. v. Church & Dwight Co., Inc.
  560 F.2d 1325· 7th Cir.· 1977-08-17 ·cited 58×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court affirmed the preliminary injunction, finding a likelihood of success on the merits for trademark infringement and unfair competition due to consumer confusion, and that the defendant's antitrust claims did not preclude the injunction.
• Muzquiz v. City OF SAN Antonio
  528 F.2d 499· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-27 ·cited 58×·via Mandatory Injunction
• Eason v. Dickson
  390 F.2d 585· 9th Cir.· 1968-01-30 ·cited 58×
  A premature notice of appeal from an order denying a three-judge court can be treated as an appeal from the subsequent final judgment if no prejudice results. The refusal to convene a three-judge court and the grant of summary judgment were correct.
• LEE v. Tahash
  352 F.2d 970· 8th Cir.· 1965-12-01 ·cited 58×
  The court held that prison correspondence restrictions are generally not subject to judicial review unless they amount to unlawful administration of a prison sentence, such as denying access to courts or discriminating based on protected characteristics.
• Bullock v. United States
  265 F.2d 683· 6th Cir.· 1959-02-27 ·cited 58×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that the appellants were properly convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order mandating school desegregation, and that various procedural and evidentiary challenges raised on appeal lacked merit.
• Atlas Travel Serv., Inc. v. Morelly
  98 So. 2d 816· Fla. 1st DCA· 1957-12-06 ·cited 58×
  The court held that a non-compete agreement in an employment contract, executed after the effective date of Fla. Stat. § 542.12, is enforceable by injunction if reasonable, even if prior common law would have prohibited it.
• Nat Yanish v. Barber
  232 F.2d 939· 9th Cir.· 1956-04-02 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the district judge's findings of "technical contempt" and "good faith" were unwarranted given prior rulings.
• City of Jacksonville & John L. Hall v. The Glidden Co.
  124 Fla. 690· Fla.· 1936-06-25 ·cited 58×
  This case concerns whether a company refining crude turpentine into oil of turpentine is considered an "industrial plant" engaged in "refining of oils" for tax exemption purposes under the Florida Constitution. The court affirmed the lower court's decision, finding the company's
• Hopkins v. Baldwin
  123 Fla. 649· Fla.· 1936-04-10 ·cited 58×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the validity of Chapter 16981 (the Educational Institutions Act of 1935) and the State Board of Control's plan to issue revenue certificates secured only by dormitory and dining hall fees at three state educational institutions. The court held tha
• S. Utils. Co. v. City of Palatka
  86 Fla. 583· Fla.· 1923-12-21 ·cited 58×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a decree compelling Southern Utilities Company to comply with a 1914 franchise ordinance fixing the rate for commercial electric lighting at 10 cents per kilowatt-hour. The court held that a municipality may enter into binding rate contracts wit
• Reebok Int'l v. Marnatech Enters., Inc.
  970 F.2d 552· 9th Cir.· 1992-07-02 ·cited 57×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that in Lanham Act cases, a district court can in some instances issue a freeze of some assets for some period of time.
• Church OF Scientology Flag Serv. ORG., Inc. v. City OF Clearwater
  777 F.2d 598· 11th Cir.· 1985-11-13 ·cited 57×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court vacated injunctions against a repealed ordinance due to mootness, dismissed appeals of interlocutory orders regarding a successor ordinance as improvidently granted, and affirmed the denial of preliminary injunctive relief.
• Borg-Warner Acceptance Corp. v. Hall
  685 F.2d 1306· 11th Cir.· 1982-09-16 ·cited 57×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that the Bankruptcy Judge's order was a final order, not interlocutory, and thus appealable.
• Liza Danielle, Inc. v. Jamko, Inc.
  408 So. 2d 735· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-01-12 ·cited 57×
  Jamko, Inc. sought an injunction against Moriber and Liza Danielle, Inc. for violating an exclusivity clause in Jamko's warehouse lease by leasing space to a competing shoe store. The court granted the injunction, but the appellate court reversed, holding that Jamko had an adequa
• McCRAY v. Sullivan
  509 F.2d 1332· 5th Cir.· 1975-03-19 ·cited 57×
  The court held that while some prison conditions did not violate the Eighth Amendment or prior injunctions, others, particularly concerning punitive isolation and mail processing, required further consideration or reversal.
• United States Steel Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  456 F.2d 483· 3d Cir.· 1972-02-03 ·cited 57×·via Injunction Bond
  The court held that recovery of attorneys' fees and expenses incurred due to an improvidently issued injunction is limited to the amount of the injunction bond when pursued in the same proceeding.