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

• Brotherhood OF Railroad Trainmen v. S. Ry. Co.
  393 F.2d 303· 5th Cir.· 1968-04-11 ·cited 10×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that the unions' strike was a labor dispute under the Norris-LaGuardia Act, and the district court erred in issuing an injunction because the unions had followed the procedures of the Railway Labor Act and were free to resort to self-help.
• Ransburg Electro-Coating Corp. v. Ionic Electrostatic Corp.
  395 F.2d 92· 4th Cir.· 1968-04-11 ·cited 10×·via Injunctive Order
  The court held that the defendant was not in contempt because the electrostatic forces in its new devices were insubstantial and did not exceed those present in the prior art, thus not infringing the plaintiff's patents.
• Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, Local 1416, AFL-CIO v. E. S.S. Lines, Inc.
  206 So. 2d 473· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-01-30 ·cited 10×·via Dissolution Of Injunction
  The court held that it was error to cancel an injunction bond and release the surety while a separate appeal from the final decree making the injunction permanent was still pending.
• Diedrich v. Zoning Comm'n OF the Dist. OF Columbia
  393 F.2d 666· D.C. Cir.· 1968-01-24 ·cited 10×·via Mandatory Injunction
  The court held that the Commission's denial of a zoning map amendment was not arbitrary or capricious, and thus affirmed the lower court's judgment.
• Riess v. Murchison
  384 F.2d 727· 9th Cir.· 1967-10-24 ·cited 10×·via Interlocutory Injunction
  A party's alleged repudiation of contractual obligations, short of repudiating the arbitration clause itself, does not preclude them from seeking arbitration under California law.
• Symington Wayne Corp. v. Dresser Indus., Inc.
  383 F.2d 840· 2d Cir.· 1967-07-31 ·cited 10×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm, and the balance of hardships weighed against granting a preliminary injunction.
• Rutherford v. Am. Med. Ass'n
  379 F.2d 641· 7th Cir.· 1967-06-23 ·cited 10×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that plaintiffs failed to state a claim under the civil rights statutes and had not demonstrated a good faith attempt to comply with the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act's new drug approval process, thus precluding judicial review.
• Ren Morris v. Earlene V. Williams
  199 So. 2d 747· Fla. 2d DCA· 1967-06-09 ·cited 10×
  Appellants, state and county officials and liquor licensees, appealed the lower court's denial of their motions to dismiss a declaratory judgment action challenging the constitutionality of a Florida statute. The court reversed, holding that the proper venue for challenging a sta
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Inv. Corp. OF Am.
  369 F.2d 383· 7th Cir.· 1966-11-16 ·cited 10×·via Modification Of Injunction
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the district court's order denying a motion to construe a preliminary injunction, as it was neither a final decision nor an appealable interlocutory order.
• Ky. Utils. Co. v. Tenn. Valley Auth.
  375 F.2d 403· 6th Cir.· 1966-11-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the 1959 TVA Act, as interpreted by the TVA Board and supported by substantial evidence, allowed TVA to supply power to Tazewell and New Tazewell, Tennessee.
• Fair v. Dekle
  367 F.2d 377· 5th Cir.· 1966-10-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appeal concerning the 1964 election is moot, and the dismissal of the remaining claims is affirmed.
• Ferguson v. Five Points Nat'l Bank OF Miami
  187 So. 2d 45· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-05-24 ·cited 10×·via Mandatory Injunction
  A national bank cannot lend its credit to purchase commercial paper in which it has no beneficial interest, as such an agreement constitutes an unauthorized guarantee.
• Houston Oilers, Inc. v. Neely
  361 F.2d 36· 10th Cir.· 1966-05-18 ·cited 10×·via Action For Injunction
  The court held that the undisputed facts disclose a valid and enforceable contract between Neely and Houston, reversing the trial court's denial of relief.
• Miss. River Fuel Corp. v. Slayton
  359 F.2d 106· 8th Cir.· 1966-04-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission has primary jurisdiction over railroad consolidations, and federal law, specifically the Interstate Commerce Act, preempts state law and corporate charter provisions regarding shareholder voting requirements for such consolid
• United States v. Palmer
  356 F.2d 951· 5th Cir.· 1966-02-08 ·cited 10×·via Interlocutory Injunction
  The court held that the registrars' excuses for closing their offices were a sham and that the denial of the preliminary injunction was error.
• Edwards v. Habib
  366 F.2d 628· D.C. Cir.· 1965-12-03 ·cited 10×
• Switzerland Cheese Ass'n, Inc. v. E. Horne's Mkt., Inc.
  351 F.2d 552· 1st Cir.· 1965-10-19 ·cited 10×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that an interlocutory denial of a permanent injunction is not an appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).
• Pollack v. Simonson
  350 F.2d 740· D.C. Cir.· 1965-08-03 ·cited 10×·via Request For Injunction
  The court held that the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board failed to provide proper notice to applicants when their applications were mutually exclusive.
• Nat'l Chemsearch Corp. of N.Y., Inc. v. Bogatin
  349 F.2d 363· 3d Cir.· 1965-07-27 ·cited 10×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court exceeded its discretion by granting a preliminary injunction for a fixed one-year period.
• Hulburt OIL & Grease Co. v. Hulburt OIL & Grease Co.
  346 F.2d 260· 7th Cir.· 1965-06-03 ·cited 10×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo pending final determination of the action.
• Mrs. G. T. Smith, Jr. v. Bolte
  172 So. 2d 624· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-03-12 ·cited 10×
  This interlocutory appeal addresses whether citizens and taxpayers who own property adjacent to a state park have standing to challenge the Board of Parks and Historic Memorials' decision to permit operation of a miniature railroad in the park. The court held that adjacent proper
• Donald F. Duncan, Inc. v. Royal Tops Mfg. Co., Inc.
  343 F.2d 669· 7th Cir.· 1965-03-03 ·cited 10×·via Injunction Enforcement
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in discharging a rule to show cause for contempt.
• Vorachek v. United States
  337 F.2d 797· 8th Cir.· 1964-11-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the complaint failed to state grounds for jurisdiction and the United States had not waived sovereign immunity. The dismissal should be based solely on lack of jurisdiction.
• Switzerland Co. v. Udall
  337 F.2d 56· 4th Cir.· 1964-09-30 ·cited 10×
  An action seeking injunctive relief against federal officials to compel removal of obstructions and provide access is barred by sovereign immunity when the officials acted within the scope of their delegated authority, even if their actions were wrongful.
• Jamy Corp. v. Riddell
  337 F.2d 11· 9th Cir.· 1964-09-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a taxpayer in receivership has a right to have tax claims adjudicated in the receivership court, and failure to do so bars later injunctions.
• United States v. Houston H. Feaster
  330 F.2d 671· 5th Cir.· 1964-04-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the National Mediation Board has a right to access carrier records to determine employee status for representation disputes, and this right is enforceable by injunction even without explicit statutory authorization for such suits or subpoena power.
• Murphy v. Wash. Am. League Base Ball Club, Inc.
  324 F.2d 394· D.C. Cir.· 1963-07-18 ·cited 10×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the denial of a preliminary injunction against salary increases was not an abuse of discretion, and that the corporation's payment of legal fees for officers charged with misconduct requires separate representation.
• The Plymouth Rubber Co., Inc. v. Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co.
  321 F.2d 151· 1st Cir.· 1963-07-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that prior litigation established that the patent requires both a liquid and a resinous plasticizer, and that using only a resinous plasticizer, even with low-molecular-weight components, does not infringe.
• Meekins, Inc. v. Boire
  320 F.2d 445· 5th Cir.· 1963-07-08 ·cited 10×·via Mandatory Injunction
  A federal district court lacks jurisdiction to compel the NLRB Regional Director to seek injunctive relief when the plaintiffs have failed to exhaust their administrative remedies by seeking review from the General Counsel.
• Publishers' Ass'n OF NEW York City (on behalf of its member v. NEW York Mailers' Union No. SIX
  317 F.2d 624· 2d Cir.· 1963-05-20 ·cited 10×·via Labor Dispute Injunctions
  A district court order compelling arbitration is affirmed, but an order staying union action is reversed because it violates the Norris-LaGuardia Act.
• Parker v. Panama City & its Mayor
  151 So. 2d 469· Fla. 1st DCA· 1963-03-26 ·cited 10×
  W. M. Parker, a Panama City taxpayer, challenged a $65,000 contract between the city and Hunnicutt and Associates for property revaluation, claiming the contract violated the city charter's competitive bidding requirements and Florida's real estate licensing laws. The court affir
• Gaito v. Prasse
  312 F.2d 169· 3d Cir.· 1963-01-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant failed to state a violation of a constitutional right and had not exhausted administrative remedies.
• Lafy Abdo v. City OF Daytona Beach
  147 So. 2d 598· Fla. 1st DCA· 1962-12-18 ·cited 10×
  A motel owner challenged a Daytona Beach ordinance prohibiting outdoor signs displaying room rates, arguing it violated his property rights and was not a valid exercise of police power. The court held the ordinance unreasonable and discriminatory because it singled out motel rate
• J. M. Fields OF Anderson, Inc. v. The Kroger Co.
  310 F.2d 562· 5th Cir.· 1962-11-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction because the evidence supported findings of notice and irreparable injury.
• Beal v. Waltz
  309 F.2d 721· 5th Cir.· 1962-11-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a shipowner cannot obtain the benefit of a state court judgment while simultaneously enjoining the prosecution of that same action in federal limitation proceedings.
• Nelson v. The Honorable H. H. Grooms
  307 F.2d 76· 5th Cir.· 1962-08-17 ·cited 10×
  The court implies that the district court has a duty to act promptly on desegregation cases, even if novel aspects are involved.
• Milk Drivers & Dairy Emps. Union Local NO. 388 v. Dairymen's League Co-Operative Ass'n, Inc.
  304 F.2d 913· 2d Cir.· 1962-07-19 ·cited 10×·via Application For Injunction
  The court affirmed the district court's decision to stay proceedings and deny an injunction, finding it within the court's discretion given a pending state court action on the same dispute.
• Am. Cyanamid Co. v. Ellis-Foster Co.
  298 F.2d 244· 3d Cir.· 1962-01-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the license agreement granted a worldwide, royalty-free license to practice inventions in the alkyd resin field, and that Ellis-Foster's prior conduct estopped them from claiming infringement.
• Hunter v. Carmichael
  133 So. 2d 584· Fla. 2d DCA· 1961-09-27 ·cited 10×
  In this taxpayer suit challenging a city attorney's fee payment authorized by the Cocoa City Council, the court reversed the lower court's decision and held that the council's authorization of payment to the Mayor's counsel for services in a declaratory judgment suit against othe
• Dyer v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  291 F.2d 774· 8th Cir.· 1961-06-30 ·cited 10×·via Suit For Injunction
  The Court of Appeals held that while Dyer violated the SEC's order by mailing a postcard that constituted proxy solicitation, the broad injunction against him was not warranted due to a lack of demonstrated future violation risk. The dismissal of his counterclaim was affirmed.
• Telephonics Corp. & Fabrionics Corp. v. Lindly & Co., Inc.
  291 F.2d 445· 2d Cir.· 1961-06-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court had the power to enjoin the prosecution of a duplicative lawsuit in another forum and that New York was the more appropriate forum.
• B. W. Photo Utils. v. Republic Molding Corp.
  280 F.2d 806· 9th Cir.· 1960-07-15 ·cited 10×·via Interlocutory Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction, as there was credible evidence supporting the appellee's request for relief pending trial.
• Crane Co. v. Briggs Mfg. Co.
  280 F.2d 747· 6th Cir.· 1960-06-10 ·cited 10×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was properly granted because the equities favored the plaintiff, and the potential harm to the plaintiff from the defendant gaining board control outweighed any harm to the defendant from the injunction.
• Green v. Wisner
  119 So. 2d 814· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-04-22 ·cited 10×·via Injunctive Decree
  This case involves a tax classification dispute regarding $491,619.19 in uninvested funds held by brokers for the Wisner taxpayers. The court held that these liquid, unencumbered funds constitute Class A intangible personal property subject to the lower tax rate, rather than Clas
• Burton N. Pugach v. Honorable Isidore Dollinger
  275 F.2d 503· 2d Cir.· 1960-02-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a federal court should not grant a stay of a state criminal proceeding based on the admissibility of evidence under state rules of evidence, as this would constitute an improper intrusion into state judicial administration.
• Radford v. Radford
  117 So. 2d 522· Fla. 1st DCA· 1960-01-21 ·cited 10×
  Walter Radford's children appealed an injunction preventing them from partitioning a house that their father devised to them. The court held that because their father's ex-wife retained the sole use and possession of the property under the divorce decree (for so long as she used
• Solex Labs., Inc. v. Plastic Contact Lens Co.
  268 F.2d 637· 7th Cir.· 1959-06-24 ·cited 10×·via Injunction Bond
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction against the patent owner for misrepresenting patent rights and harassing customers, nor in setting the bond amount.
• Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Polychrome Corp.
  267 F.2d 772· 7th Cir.· 1959-06-11 ·cited 10×·via Interlocutory Injunction
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Polychrome's motion for an interlocutory injunction against Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company's (Three M) patent infringement litigation and publicity.
• Duckworth v. James
  267 F.2d 224· 4th Cir.· 1959-05-18 ·cited 10×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that a city council's attempt to close public schools by withholding funds, under the guise of appropriation control, constituted state action violating constitutional rights and was subject to federal injunction.
• LA Salle Nat'l Bank v. 222 E. Chestnut St. Corp.
  267 F.2d 247· 7th Cir.· 1959-05-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the dismissal of a prior malicious prosecution complaint for failure to allege special interference was not a determination on the merits, thus not barring the current suit by res judicata. However, the claim based on the Federal Court Injunction Suit was corr