Injunctive Relief

8,020 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Rincon Band OF Mission Indians v. Cnty. OF SAN Diego & J. C. O'Connor
  495 F.2d 1· 9th Cir.· 1974-03-18 ·cited 23×
  The court held that a general threat of enforcement, without a history of prosecution or specific immediacy, is insufficient to establish a justiciable case or controversy under Article III of the Constitution and the Declaratory Judgment Act. The court also found that a party ca
• City OF N. Miami v. Margulies
  289 So. 2d 424· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-01-22 ·cited 23×
  The City of North Miami appealed a trial court judgment ordering it to issue a building permit to Martin Margulies for a multi-family apartment development. The court held that the city was equitably estopped from denying the permit after Margulies substantially relied on the cit
• La. Power & Light Co. v. United GAS Pipe Line Co.
  456 F.2d 326· 5th Cir.· 1972-01-14 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the case based on LP&L's failure to demonstrate irreparable injury and in concluding that the FPC had unquestionable jurisdiction, reversing the dismissal and remanding for further fact development.
• Nat'l Airlines v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers
  416 F.2d 998· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-23 ·cited 23×
  The court held that while the carrier's resort to self-help was justified due to an unmanageable wildcat strike, the mass discharge of strikers exceeded permissible bounds; reinstatement rights depend on whether strikers were replaced.
• Berman v. Narragansett Racing Ass'n, Inc.
  414 F.2d 311· 1st Cir.· 1969-07-31 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' claims could be aggregated to meet the jurisdictional amount requirement because they shared a common and undivided interest in a fund, and that the class was sufficiently defined and not antagonistic.
• United States v. Article OF Drug consisting of undetermined quantities of vitamin
  362 F.2d 923· 3d Cir.· 1966-07-11 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the finding that vitamin products were misbranded due to inadequate directions for use, and that the injunction was permissible, though it required modification for specificity.
• United Textile Workers OF Am., AFL-CIO v. Textile Workers Union OF Am.
  258 F.2d 743· 7th Cir.· 1958-08-11 ·cited 23×
  Federal courts have jurisdiction under Section 301 of the LMRA to enforce 'No-Raiding Agreements' between labor unions, even after the agreement's expiration.
• Int'l Indus., Inc. v. Warren Petroleum Corp.
  248 F.2d 696· 3d Cir.· 1957-09-26 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court's finding of tortious appropriation of trade secrets was not clearly erroneous, but reversed and remanded the accounting phase for recomputation of damages and reconsideration of injunctive relief.
• Pure Foods, Inc. v. SIR Sirloin, Inc.
  84 So. 2d 51· Fla.· 1955-12-02 ·cited 23×
  Sir Sirloin, Inc. appealed a chancellor's decree that denied it meaningful relief against Pure Foods, Inc. for alleged unfair competition and misappropriation of trade secrets and customer lists. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, finding the decree was internally contradictory
• Switzer Bros., Inc. v. Locklin
  207 F.2d 483· 7th Cir.· 1953-10-08 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the denial of an intervenor's application to file a counterclaim seeking injunctive relief is an appealable order, and that the intervenor had a right to file such a counterclaim.
• Mrs. L. Wilkinson v. Woodward
  105 Fla. 376· Fla.· 1932-05-02 ·cited 23×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of a bill seeking to enjoin state game officials from seizing and destroying fishing nets under Chapter 13644 Acts of 1929. The court held that the complainants failed to allege sufficient facts to challenge the constitutionality of
• Pinnacle Advertising & Mktg. Grp. Inc. v. Pinnacle Advertising & Mktg. Grp., LLC
  7 F.4th 989· 11th Cir.· 2021-08-02 ·cited 22×
  Two Illinois and Florida-based advertising companies with identical names disputed trademark ownership, with Pinnacle Illinois suing Pinnacle Florida for infringement under the Lanham Act and Pinnacle Florida counterclaiming to cancel Pinnacle Illinois's trademark registrations.
• Cent. Magnetic Imaging Open MRI of Plantation, Ltd. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins.
  789 F. Supp. 2d 1311· S.D. Fla.· 2011-06-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the breach of contract claim could proceed, but the unjust enrichment and declaratory/injunctive relief claims were dismissed.
• Reese v. JPMorgan Chase & Co.
  686 F. Supp. 2d 1291· S.D. Fla.· 2009-10-15 ·cited 22×
  The court granted motions to dismiss, finding that the plaintiff failed to state claims for rescission under TILA, fraud in the inducement, and under the Florida Fair Lending Act due to insufficient pleading and statutory limitations.
• Rain Bird Corp. v. Taylor
  665 F. Supp. 2d 1258· N.D. Fla.· 2009-10-14 ·cited 22×
  The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant summary judgment for the plaintiff on all counts, finding no genuine issue of material fact regarding trademark infringement, unfair competition, and dilution.
• Congressman Robert Wexler v. Lepore
  878 So. 2d 1276· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-08-06 ·cited 22×
  Congressman Robert Wexler appealed the dismissal of his complaint seeking declaratory and injunctive relief regarding Palm Beach County's use of touchscreen voting systems that allegedly failed to comply with Florida's statutory manual recount requirements. The Fourth District Co
• Keshbro, Inc. v. City OF Miami
  801 So. 2d 864· Fla.· 2001-07-12 ·cited 22×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between the Third and Second District Courts of Appeal regarding whether temporary closures of properties ordered by nuisance abatement boards to abate drug and prostitution nuisances constitute compensable takings under the Lucas cat
• Infinity Radio Inc. v. Whitby
  780 So. 2d 248· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-02-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the 1999 amendment constituted a new agreement that incorporated the 1995 non-compete clause by reference, entitling Infinity to enforce it.
• James Noble, M.D. v. Martin Mem'l Hosp. Ass'n, Inc.
  710 So. 2d 567· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-12-24 ·cited 22×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment based on HCQIA immunity and denial of leave to amend, finding no error in those rulings.
• MacIas v. HBC OF Fla., Inc.
  694 So. 2d 88· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-04-23 ·cited 22×
  A plaintiff must be an aggrieved party and suffer actual losses to bring a claim under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA).
• Bankers Ins. Co. v. Fla. Residential Prop. & Cas. Joint Underwriting Ass'n
  689 So. 2d 1127· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-02-25 ·cited 22×
  Bankers Insurance Company appealed the denial of its request for a temporary injunction against FRPCJUA's decision to select different servicing carriers. The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the denial, holding that Bankers failed to exhaust available administrati
• Tamiami P'rs v. Miccosukee Tribe OF Indians OF Florida
  999 F.2d 503· 11th Cir.· 1993-08-16 ·cited 22×
  Tamiami Partners, Ltd. (TPL), a non-Indian gaming company, sued the Miccosukee Tribe in federal district court seeking to compel arbitration of a contract dispute and to enjoin the Tribe from exercising self-help remedies under a gaming management agreement. The Eleventh Circuit
• Ayuda, Inc. v. Thornburgh
  948 F.2d 742· D.C. Cir.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear claims challenging the INS' administration of IRCA, as such challenges must be brought through the statutory administrative and judicial review process, typically in the courts of appeals.
• Frio ICE, S.A. v. Sunfruit, Inc.
  918 F.2d 154· 11th Cir.· 1990-11-30 ·cited 22×
  Federal courts have jurisdiction under PACA to entertain injunctive actions by private parties to enforce payment from a statutory trust, and possess the authority to order segregation of trust assets to prevent dissipation.
• In re William M. Kunstler. In re Barry Nakell. In re Lewis Pitts v. Britt
  914 F.2d 505· 4th Cir.· 1990-10-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that Rule 11 sanctions can be imposed after a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2), and that the attorneys violated Rule 11 by failing to conduct a reasonable inquiry into the facts and law, and by filing the complaint for an improper purpose.
• Cardenas v. Maria Marta Colomer Caceres de Solis
  570 So. 2d 996· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-09-11 ·cited 22×
  A Florida appellate court upheld a temporary injunction freezing half of a defendant's Miami bank accounts at the request of a Guatemalan family court in a marital property dispute between Guatemalan citizens. The court held that Florida comity principles permit enforcement of ce
• Nat'l Ctr. FOR Immigrants' Rights, Inc. v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  892 F.2d 814· 9th Cir.· 1989-12-21 ·cited 22×
  A notice of appeal using the generic term "defendants" in its body is sufficient to indicate that all defendants are appealing, provided it gives fair notice.
• "Bill" J. Templeton v. Creative Loafing Tampa, Inc.
  552 So. 2d 288· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-11-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that advertiser and distribution lists, containing publicly available information and personal contacts, do not qualify as trade secrets entitled to injunctive protection.
• Kelly v. Gill
  544 So. 2d 1162· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-06-15 ·cited 22×
  A former state attorney investigator challenged his termination, claiming he was entitled to protections under Florida's Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights. The court held that state attorney investigators, though designated as law enforcement officers by statute, do not qu
• G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.
  873 F.2d 985· 7th Cir.· 1989-04-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the initials 'LA' are merely descriptive for low alcohol beer and have not acquired secondary meaning, thus not being protectible as a trademark. The court also affirmed the district court's exercise of subject matter jurisdiction over Miller's declaratory jud
• THE Presbyterian Church (U.S. A.) v. The United States
  870 F.2d 518· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the churches have standing to sue for First Amendment violations due to alleged organizational injury from INS surveillance, and that sovereign immunity does not bar their claims for declaratory and injunctive relief under the APA. However, individual INS agen
• Tiedeman v. City OF Miami
  529 So. 2d 1266· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-08-23 ·cited 22×
  Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of their complaint seeking to open a temporarily closed public boat ramp at Dinner Key Marina in Miami. The court affirmed the dismissal for lack of standing and upheld attorney's fees for Show Management, Inc., but reversed the attorney's fees a
• Prisco v. United States
  851 F.2d 93· 3d Cir.· 1988-07-01 ·cited 22×
  Denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds is not immediately appealable when prospective relief claims remain pending against the official. However, if an official is only sued for damages, the denial of their qualified immunity motion is appealable.
• Benjamin v. United States
  833 F.2d 669· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the district court's dismissal of the complaint, rather than the action, did not constitute a final judgment.
• The Port Auth. Police Benevolent Ass'n, Inc. v. The Port Auth. OF NEW York & NEW Jersey
  819 F.2d 413· 3d Cir.· 1987-05-27 ·cited 22×
  The Port Authority is an arm of the state and thus entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Amoco Prod. Co. v. Hodel
  815 F.2d 352· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because Amoco's claim was a disguised claim for monetary relief exceeding $10,000, which falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Claims Court via the Tucker Act.
• Funbus Sys., Inc. v. State OF Cal. Pub. Utils. Comm'n
  801 F.2d 1120· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-30 ·cited 22×
  The Commission had authority to grant intrastate certificates based on underlying interstate routes, as the statute links the two by 'route,' not 'services' or 'operations.'
• S. DELTA Water Agency v. United States
  767 F.2d 531· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) waives sovereign immunity for suits seeking relief other than money damages, and that 28 U.S.C. § 1331 provides jurisdiction for such claims, even if the McCarran Amendment does not apply.
• Square D Co. & Big D Bldg. Supply Corp. v. Niagara Frontier Tariff Bureau, Inc.
  760 F.2d 1347· 2d Cir.· 1985-04-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Keogh doctrine, barring antitrust damages claims for filed rates, has not been overruled by statute or Supreme Court precedent, but that injunctive relief was prematurely dismissed and damages claims may be repleaded if injury resulted from acts other than
• Krug v. Meros
  468 So. 2d 299· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-03-27 ·cited 22×
  Stewart Krug sued George Meros for fraud and injunctive relief concerning timeshare vacation leases, after Meros became the successor in interest to the original lessors. The trial court applied the doctrine of estoppel by judgment based on a prior breach of contract action Krug
• Reuben Palmer v. City OF Chicago
  755 F.2d 560· 7th Cir.· 1985-02-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the plaintiffs have standing to seek preliminary injunctive relief to preserve evidence, and that principles of comity and the Younger doctrine do not bar such relief.
• Barnes v. Kline
  759 F.2d 21· D.C. Cir.· 1984-08-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that members of Congress lack standing to sue the President over the exercise of his pocket veto power, as such claims constitute generalized grievances about governmental operations rather than concrete personal injuries.
• State OF Wis. v. Caspar W. Weinberger
  745 F.2d 412· 7th Cir.· 1984-08-20 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Navy's decision not to prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) for Project ELF was not arbitrary or capricious, as the new information presented did not significantly alter the environmental picture envisioned by the original EIS.
• Elinor Nelson v. Regan
  731 F.2d 105· 2d Cir.· 1984-03-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the tax intercept program, as implemented, did not violate due process and that refunds attributable to the earned income credit are not subject to interception for past-due child support.
• Smallwood v. United AIR Lines, Inc.
  728 F.2d 614· 4th Cir.· 1984-02-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in awarding backpay because the defendant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the plaintiff would not have been hired anyway, even absent age discrimination.
• Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters v. Tex. Int'l Airlines, Inc.
  717 F.2d 157· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-27 ·cited 22×
  Federal courts lack jurisdiction over disputes concerning the representation of airline employees, even when framed as contract enforcement, as such issues fall exclusively under the National Mediation Board's purview.
• Simons v. Anne M. Gorsuch
  715 F.2d 1248· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was not required as a matter of law for the federally funded sewage treatment facility, and that the appellants were not entitled to special notice of the public hearing based on their property's distance from the site.
• Berkman v. The City OF NEW York
  705 F.2d 584· 2d Cir.· 1983-03-29 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's remedial measures, finding that reserving positions for women and approving an interim physical test were proper under Title VII.
• Gen. Fin. Corp. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  700 F.2d 366· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-10 ·cited 22×
  A suit to enjoin an FTC investigation is premature and barred if a specific statutory method for judicial review, such as subpoena enforcement, exists and is adequate.
• Taxpayers FOR Vincent v. Members OF the City Council OF the City OF LOS Angeles
  682 F.2d 847· 9th Cir.· 1982-07-30 ·cited 22×
  A municipal ordinance prohibiting the posting of signs on numerous types of public property is facially unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it is not narrowly tailored to serve a substantial governmental interest and less drastic means exist to prot