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

• Libby v. Roberts
  110 So. 2d 82· Fla. 2d DCA· 1959-03-06 ·cited 10×
  In this water rights dispute, the Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed a decree ordering a defendant to remove a dam obstructing natural drainage that had previously flowed from plaintiffs' lands through the Little Everglades area. The court held that regardless of whether t
• E. States Petroleum Corp. v. Rogers
  265 F.2d 593· D.C. Cir.· 1959-02-05 ·cited 10×·via Application For Injunction
  A single district judge has jurisdiction to determine whether the district court has jurisdiction over a case, and can dismiss for lack of jurisdiction without convening a three-judge court.
• D A & S OIL Well Servicing, Inc. v. Mitchell
  262 F.2d 552· 10th Cir.· 1958-12-19 ·cited 10×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that driving trucks carrying essential equipment to and from well sites constitutes an integral and indispensable part of the employees' principal activities and is therefore compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
• The Seneca Nation OF Indians v. Wilber M. Brucker
  262 F.2d 27· D.C. Cir.· 1958-11-25 ·cited 10×
  Congress has sufficiently and clearly authorized the taking of Seneca Nation lands for the Allegheny Reservoir Project through its appropriations acts.
• Matter of MacNEIL Bros. Co.
  259 F.2d 386· 1st Cir.· 1958-10-03 ·cited 10×·via Mandatory Injunction
  The court held that it would not grant leave to file a petition for a writ of mandamus because the petition was facially without merit and did not present an extraordinary situation.
• Charles R. Shepherd, Inc. v. Monaghan
  256 F.2d 882· 5th Cir.· 1958-06-30 ·cited 10×
  The federal court lacks jurisdiction to enjoin the collection of state taxes when an adequate state remedy exists, as provided by the Johnson Act.
• Furnish v. The Bd. OF Med. Exam'rs OF the State of Cal.
  257 F.2d 520· 9th Cir.· 1958-06-21 ·cited 10×
  The federal district court correctly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as federal courts cannot review state court decisions or enjoin state proceedings except in limited circumstances not present here.
• Shaw Bros. OIL Co. v. Parrish
  99 So. 2d 610· Fla.· 1958-01-08 ·cited 10×
  Shaw Brothers Oil Company appealed a decree granting Parrish the right to occupy a service station premises under an extension option in his sublease with Young. The court affirmed, holding that Shaw, having accepted increased rent payments from Parrish for three years under the
• Schlosser v. Commonwealth Edison Co.
  250 F.2d 478· 7th Cir.· 1958-01-02 ·cited 10×·via Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that a preliminary injunction requiring payment of disputed funds before a final determination of the merits is generally not warranted, especially when the underlying claim is controverted.
• The Parkleigh House, Inc. v. Faye Wahl
  97 So. 2d 714· Fla. 3d DCA· 1957-10-22 ·cited 10×
  A tenant sought enforcement of an alleged oral agreement granting exclusive rights to sell food and delicacies at leased premises, which was not included in the written lease. The appellate court reversed the trial court's decree that had enjoined the landlord from competing uses
• Hammond v. Carlyon
  96 So. 2d 219· Fla.· 1957-06-28 ·cited 10×
  Duval County commissioners denied a rezoning request for property fronting the Jacksonville Expressway from Residence A to Business A-1. The trial court found the property substantially useless for residential purposes and that denial was arbitrary and discriminatory, enjoining e
• Switchmen's Union OF N. Am. v. S. Pac. Co.
  253 F.2d 81· 9th Cir.· 1957-04-30 ·cited 10×
  A carrier violates its exclusive bargaining obligation by entering into a dues check-off agreement with a minority union for employees represented by the majority union.
• Schustack v. Lt. General Thomas W. Herren
  234 F.2d 134· 2d Cir.· 1956-06-01 ·cited 10×
• In re Magnus Harmonica Corp.
  233 F.2d 803· 3d Cir.· 1956-05-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the federal district court improperly granted an injunction to stay proceedings in a state court, as it was not authorized by statute or necessary to aid federal jurisdiction.
• Watson v. City OF NEW Smyrna Beach
  85 So. 2d 548· Fla.· 1956-02-10 ·cited 10×
  A taxpayer challenged a city contract awarded to an individual who was the partner of a sitting city commissioner, arguing the contract was a subterfuge to circumvent municipal conflict-of-interest rules. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's judgment, holding that
• Streep v. Sample
  84 So. 2d 586· Fla.· 1956-01-11 ·cited 10×
  Appellants challenged a city's rezoning ordinance, arguing it violated Florida's municipal zoning statute by failing to obtain the supermajority vote required when property owners properly protest rezoning. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's dismissal, holding t
• Nat'l Dryer Mfg. Corp. & Nat'l Dryer Sales Corp. v. The Nat'l Drying Mach. Co.
  228 F.2d 349· 3d Cir.· 1955-12-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying an accounting of profits and counsel fees, affirming the injunctions granted.
• Paramount Film Distrib. Corp. v. Vill. Theatre, Inc.
  228 F.2d 721· 10th Cir.· 1955-12-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting a prior decree as evidence and in submitting the issue of monopoly to the jury, requiring a new trial.
• N. Am. Aircoach Sys. v. N. Am. Aviation, Inc.
  231 F.2d 205· 9th Cir.· 1955-09-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff acquired an exclusive secondary meaning in the name 'North American' in connection with aviation, and the defendants' use of the name constituted unfair competition and warranted an injunction.
• Rawson v. United States
  225 F.2d 855· 9th Cir.· 1955-09-21 ·cited 10×
  Land purchased by the United States for specific purposes, even if containing minerals, is not open to location under general mining laws.
• Bechik Prods., Inc. v. Flexible Prods., Inc.
  225 F.2d 603· 2d Cir.· 1955-08-09 ·cited 10×
  An injunction restraining the institution of suits against a patent infringer's customers may issue only on condition that the infringer furnish a bond to cover any pecuniary award to the patentee.
• Cadillac Publ'g Co., Inc. v. Summerfield
  227 F.2d 29· D.C. Cir.· 1955-06-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant failed to exhaust its administrative remedies before seeking judicial intervention.
• Forbes v. Bushnell Steel Constr. Co.
  76 So. 2d 268· Fla.· 1954-12-03 ·cited 10×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed an appeal from a lower court's decree that cancelled ad valorem tangible personal property tax assessments on two crane vehicles owned by a construction company.
• Seaboard Air Line R. Co. v. GAY
  74 So. 2d 569· Fla.· 1954-07-23 ·cited 10×
  Seaboard Air Line Railroad challenged the constitutionality of Florida's railroad property assessment procedures, arguing that the Railroad Assessment Board's failure to disclose evidence and submit to cross-examination violated due process. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the a
• Lawlor v. Nat'l Screen Serv. Corp.
  211 F.2d 934· 3d Cir.· 1954-03-30 ·cited 10×
  A dismissal with prejudice, even by stipulation, has the same res judicata effect as a judgment after trial, barring subsequent suits on the same cause of action.
• Heyward v. Pub. Hous. Admin.
  214 F.2d 222· D.C. Cir.· 1954-03-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court should not have entertained jurisdiction to decide the issues without the Savannah Housing Authority as a party, exercising sound discretion.
• Kelaghan v. Indus. Tr. Co.
  211 F.2d 134· 1st Cir.· 1954-03-16 ·cited 10×
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the corporate consolidation, which the plaintiff sought to enjoin, has been completed.
• Voss v. Hinds
  208 F.2d 912· 10th Cir.· 1953-12-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a statutory prohibition against enjoining tax collection barred the taxpayers' suit, as their claims regarding interest liability did not present extraordinary circumstances.
• Minkoff v. Payne
  210 F.2d 689· D.C. Cir.· 1953-11-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the District Court properly granted summary judgment because the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board's denial of the license renewal was not arbitrary or capricious and was supported by substantial evidence, and the appellant failed to raise a genuine issue of ma
• Richfield Oil Corp. v. United States
  207 F.2d 864· 9th Cir.· 1953-10-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the action because the claims were either maritime in nature, barred by the Suits in Admiralty Act, or lacked final agency action for review under the Administrative Procedure Act, and in all cases, adequate remedies exist
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Katz Drug Co.
  207 F.2d 168· 8th Cir.· 1953-09-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an employer's solicitation of employee affidavits to gather evidence for a judicial proceeding, when conducted without coercion or intent to interfere with union rights, does not constitute an unfair labor practice under the Labor Management Relations Act.
• Richard Store Co. v. Richard's Warehouse Sales & Auction Gallery, Inc.
  63 So. 2d 502· Fla.· 1953-03-03 ·cited 10×
  Richard Store Co. appealed a trademark injunction limiting defendant from using "Richards" prominently in advertisements. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the injunction but broadened it to prohibit any advertising that could represent the parties as affiliated or connected in
• Tobin v. Little Rock Packing Co.
  202 F.2d 234· 8th Cir.· 1953-02-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the employer's guaranteed wage plan, where employees were paid for a guaranteed number of hours at an hourly rate including overtime, even if they worked fewer hours, did not violate the Fair Labor Standards Act or the prior injunction, as the stipulated rate
• Rogers v. Skinner
  201 F.2d 521· 5th Cir.· 1953-01-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the suit was effectively against the United States and that the Secretary of Labor was an indispensable party, requiring dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
• Chicago & N. W. Ry. v. First Nat. Bank of Waukegan
  200 F.2d 383· 7th Cir.· 1952-12-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff's complaint stated a claim upon which relief could be granted, and the district court erred in dismissing the action.
• Mitchell Novelty Co. v. United MFG. Co.
  199 F.2d 462· 7th Cir.· 1952-10-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for unjust enrichment because the disclosed idea was not novel, was not disclosed in confidence, and was not adopted in a concrete, usable form by the defendant.
• Granz v. Harris
  198 F.2d 585· 2d Cir.· 1952-08-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an artist is entitled to prevent the publication of a garbled or substantially altered version of their work, even if uncopyrighted, and this can be considered unfair competition or passing off.
• Alberty Food Prods. v. United States
  194 F.2d 463· 9th Cir.· 1952-02-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that collateral literature promoting drugs can be considered as evidence to determine if the labeling provides adequate directions for use under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
• Dauksewicz v. United States
  194 F.2d 52· 1st Cir.· 1951-12-19 ·cited 10×
  A landlord cannot unilaterally increase rent above the established maximum and then defend an overcharge claim by offering proof of facts that would have justified an increase had they applied for it administratively.
• Mahanor v. United States
  192 F.2d 873· 1st Cir.· 1951-12-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that both husband and wife were liable for rent overcharges, and restitution was appropriate even for violations under an expired act.
• Textag Co., Inc. v. Hayslip
  192 F.2d 435· 5th Cir.· 1951-11-20 ·cited 10×·via Permanent Injunction
  The court held that the defendants' use of the 'Speed Check System' constituted infringement of the patent and violation of the injunction, and that the damages awarded were supported by the evidence.
• Pac. Am. Fisheries, Inc. v. Mullaney
  191 F.2d 137· 9th Cir.· 1951-06-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the summary judgment was erroneous because the appellant was not given an opportunity to present evidence on factual issues and the case presented grounds for declaratory and injunctive relief.
• Feeley v. Woods
  190 F.2d 228· 9th Cir.· 1951-06-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant's renovated apartment building did not qualify as a hotel exempt from rent control because it did not meet the statutory requirements for hotel status on the relevant "cut-off date" of June 30, 1947. The court also found that no new housing accom
• Kerotest MFG. Co. v. C-O-Two Fire Equip. Co.
  189 F.2d 31· 3d Cir.· 1951-05-24 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge believes the lower court did not abuse its discretion by applying the rule that the first-filed suit should take precedence.
• Porto RICO Tel. Co. v. Puerto RICO Commc'ns Auth.
  189 F.2d 39· 1st Cir.· 1951-05-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff has an adequate remedy at law under the Eminent Domain Act, and therefore, the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for want of equitable jurisdiction.
• Eskay Drugs, Inc. v. Smith
  188 F.2d 430· 5th Cir.· 1951-04-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellants' use of the name 'Enkay' constituted a colorable imitation of the appellee's trademark 'Eskay', violating the prior consent decree and injunction.
• City & Cnty. of Denver v. Denver Tramway Corp.
  187 F.2d 410· 10th Cir.· 1951-02-15 ·cited 10×·via Modification Of Injunction
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the city's motion to dissolve the injunction, as the court retained jurisdiction to enforce its prior decree and the circumstances did not warrant vacation.
• Cowling v. Deep Vein Coal Co., Inc.
  183 F.2d 652· 7th Cir.· 1950-05-25 ·cited 10×
  A co-tenant may proceed in federal court without joining other co-tenants, and a defect in parties plaintiff is not properly raised on a motion for summary judgment.
• Lansden v. Hart
  180 F.2d 679· 7th Cir.· 1950-02-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while plaintiffs may have alleged sufficient facts to establish federal question jurisdiction regarding the value of their business rights, the hunting ban was a valid exercise of administrative discretion under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and thus they fai
• Hunter v. Mitchell
  180 F.2d 763· D.C. Cir.· 1950-01-23 ·cited 10×·via Mandatory Injunction
  The court held that the lower court erred in granting summary judgment because a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding the reason for the appellant's demotion.