Injunctive Relief

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

• Jones v. Bd. OF Comm'rs OF the Ala. State BAR
  737 F.2d 996· 11th Cir.· 1984-07-30 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the limited right of review for an Alabama Bar applicant who has failed the examination five times, combined with the five-time limitation on taking the bar examination, violates due process.
• Sidney v. ZAH
  718 F.2d 1453· 9th Cir.· 1983-10-25 ·cited 11×
  The court affirmed the district court's contempt order and declaratory judgment, holding that the Navajo Tribe has a responsibility to comply with judicial orders effectuating the land partition, irrespective of territorial jurisdiction over individual members. The court also aff
• Josiah Henson v. The Honor Comm. OF U. VA.
  719 F.2d 69· 4th Cir.· 1983-10-05 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the University of Virginia's Honor Code procedures, while not identical to judicial proceedings, provided constitutionally sufficient due process protections for the student facing disciplinary charges.
• Fiedler v. Clark
  714 F.2d 77· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-22 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the cited federal statutes do not confer subject matter jurisdiction for a private citizen's suit seeking to enforce environmental regulations against pesticide contamination.
• Campbell v. Monroe Cnty.
  426 So. 2d 1158· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-02-08 ·cited 11×
  Campbell and Structural Homes sought injunctive relief challenging Monroe County's RU-1M zoning ordinance requiring masonry construction for residences. The court reversed the trial court's denial of injunctive relief, holding that the masonry-only requirement discriminates again
• Sanchez-Mariani v. Ellingwood
  691 F.2d 592· 1st Cir.· 1982-09-20 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were moot because the hearing she sought had been held, and her claims for damages and declaratory relief were not properly raised or were barred by sovereign immunity.
• Home Placement Serv., Inc. v. The Providence Journal Co.
  682 F.2d 274· 1st Cir.· 1982-06-18 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the newspaper publisher's refusal to accept rental information advertisements from a business charging a fee, based on a policy against such ads, violated Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act because it constituted an unlawful restraint of trade and an illegal
• Louis v. Meissner
  532 F. Supp. 881· S.D. Fla.· 1982-02-24 ·cited 11×
  The court held that judicial review of exclusion proceedings is limited to habeas corpus after a final order of exclusion is entered, and that plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge procedures prior to such an order.
• Merrill Lynch v. Reese M. Stidham, III
  658 F.2d 1098· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-15 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the non-disclosure clause of the employment contract is enforceable, but the non-competition clause is not due to the lack of a specified geographical territory. The district court's permanent injunction is affirmed in part and vacated in part.
• Lawson v. Kolender
  658 F.2d 1362· 9th Cir.· 1981-10-15 ·cited 11×
  The court held that California Penal Code § 647(e) is unconstitutional as it violates the Fourth Amendment and the Due Process Clause by being void for vagueness and encouraging arbitrary enforcement, but reversed the denial of a jury trial.
• Adelina Zambrana v. Califano
  651 F.2d 842· 2d Cir.· 1981-06-15 ·cited 11×
  The district court exceeded its discretion by declining to exercise jurisdiction over a case concerning delays in Social Security Act hearings.
• Marathon OIL Co. v. United States Dep't OF Energy
  642 F.2d 436· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1981-02-03 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the temporary crude oil allocation order was not ripe for judicial review because it was not a final agency action and did not cause irreparable harm.
• Marshall v. VAN Matre
  634 F.2d 1115· 8th Cir.· 1980-11-25 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying injunctive relief and back wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, as the employer's good faith and desire to provide employment were insufficient reasons to deny relief when violations persisted.
• In re June 20
  622 F.2d 166· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-24 ·cited 11×
  Disclosure of grand jury materials to FERC was improper because FERC's intended administrative proceedings and potential future litigation were not 'judicial proceedings' as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)(3)(C)(i).
• Nat'l Black Police Ass'n v. Velde
  631 F.2d 784· D.C. Cir.· 1980-05-14 ·cited 11×
  The court held that federal officials are not entitled to absolute immunity for failure to terminate funding to discriminatory recipients, and that 1976 amendments did not moot the appellants' claims.
• Parke v. Califano
  564 F.2d 1200· 6th Cir.· 1977-10-26 ·cited 11×
  The district court lacked jurisdiction to review the FDA's decision to initiate enforcement actions, as Parke Davis had an adequate remedy in the pending seizure actions.
• Blue Ribbon Quality Meats, Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  560 F.2d 874· 8th Cir.· 1977-07-21 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the action for declaratory and injunctive relief, finding that appellants had an adequate remedy at law.
• Rogers v. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n
  D.D.C.· 1977-02-15 ·cited 11×
  The court held that a plaintiff is not entitled to relief under Title VII if they would not have been selected for the position even absent discrimination, regardless of any discriminatory factors considered.
• Local 194 v. Standard Brands, Inc.
  540 F.2d 864· 7th Cir.· 1976-08-24 ·cited 11×
  A labor union has standing to represent its members in an action for injunctive and declaratory relief under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, but not for monetary damages.
• Torcise v. Germinal A. Perez
  319 So. 2d 41· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-09-02 ·cited 11×
  Contracts for deed, under Florida law, are deemed mortgages, entitling purchasers to possession and use of the property prior to full payment.
• Chem. Specialties Mfrs. Ass'n, Inc. v. Lowery
  452 F.2d 431· 2d Cir.· 1971-11-10 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court erred in abstaining from jurisdiction and that the plaintiff raised substantial questions regarding the conflict between New York City regulations and federal preemption laws, warranting a trial.
• Hodgson v. Ricky Fashions, Inc.
  434 F.2d 1261· 5th Cir.· 1970-11-09 ·cited 11×
  The court held that current compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act does not preclude injunctive relief, and that employees can recover unpaid wages even if the exact amount is difficult to ascertain due to employer record falsification.
• French v. Emmett W. Bashful
  425 F.2d 182· 5th Cir.· 1970-03-23 ·cited 11×
• Heaton Distrib. Co., Inc. v. Union Tank CAR Co.
  387 F.2d 477· 8th Cir.· 1967-12-27 ·cited 11×
  A former dealer who continued to use a manufacturer's trademark and palmed off other products after contract termination is liable for breach of contract, unfair competition, and trademark infringement, entitling the manufacturer to damages and injunctive relief.
• YOO HOO OF Fla. Corp. v. Catroneo
  175 So. 2d 220· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-05-18 ·cited 11×
  Yoo Hoo of Florida Corp. appealed the dismissal of its complaint seeking to enjoin the former owners of its Yoo Hoo beverage business from soliciting customers through a competing "Zippy" beverage business. The court reversed, holding that the sale of a business and its goodwill
• Richard Bertram & Co. v. Green
  132 So. 2d 24· Fla. 3d DCA· 1961-06-29 ·cited 11×
  Richard Bertram & Co., a yacht broker, appealed a tax assessment by Florida's comptroller under the sales and use tax law. The court reversed the assessment, holding that the comptroller's rule denying the "occasional and isolated sale" exemption to yacht leases exceeded the comp
• Brown v. Orange Cnty. Bd. OF Pub. Instruction
  128 So. 2d 181· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-12-23 ·cited 11×
  Parents and taxpayers challenged the Orange County school system's authorization of Gideon Bible distribution in public schools as violating the First Amendment's establishment clause and Florida's constitutional prohibition on preferential treatment of religious sects. The court
• Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Metro. Ins. Co.
  277 F.2d 896· 7th Cir.· 1960-05-13 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss, as the plaintiff's action for injunctive relief based on a deceptively similar corporate name was not barred by the Illinois Insurance Code and was properly granted.
• Fin. Oversight & Mgmt. Bd. for P. R. v. Centro De Periodismo Investigativo, Inc.
  598 U.S. 339· U.S.· 2023-05-11 ·cited 10×
  The Supreme Court held that the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA) does not abrogate the Financial Oversight and Management Board's sovereign immunity from lawsuit, because Congress failed to make its intent to strip that immunity unmistakably
• Biden v. Texas
  597 U.S. 785· U.S.· 2022-06-30 ·cited 10×
  Texas and Missouri sued to challenge the Biden administration's termination of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), which required certain asylum seekers to wait in Mexico during their removal proceedings, arguing that the termination violated the Immigration and Nationality A
• Point Conversions, LLC v. 1D19-4290
  46 Fla. L. Weekly D489· Fla. 1st DCA· 2021-05-19 ·cited 10×
  Point Conversions, LLC appealed the dismissal of its lawsuits against hotel franchisees, which were filed in state court. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the lawsuits were fundamentally about patent infringement and thus fell under the exclusive jurisdict
• Sand Lake Hills Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Busch
  210 So. 3d 706· Fla. 5th DCA· 2017-01-20 ·cited 10×
  Sand Lake Hills Homeowners Association appealed a judgment awarding attorney's fees to the Busches under two statutory provisions. The court affirmed the award under section 712.08 for filing a false Marketable Record Title Act notice, but reversed the award under the ARD's fee p
• Inphynet Contracting Servs., Inc. v. R.V. Matthews III
  196 So. 3d 449· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-06-22 ·cited 10×
  This case addresses the propriety of bilateral class certification in a lawsuit challenging excessive medical records copying fees. The Fourth District reversed the trial court's certification of a defendant class, finding standing defects, but affirmed plaintiff class certificat
• Nat'l Auto Serv. Ctrs., Inc. v. F/R 550, LLC
  192 So. 3d 498· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-03-30 ·cited 10×
  This case interprets Florida's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (FUFTA) concerning the timeliness of claims to void fraudulent transfers. The court held that the one-year discovery savings clause in section 726.110(1) is triggered by discovery of the transfer itself, not discovery
• Neapolitan Enters., LLC v. The City OF Naples
  185 So. 3d 585· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-01-29 ·cited 10×
  Neapolitan Enterprises appeals the dismissal of its declaratory and injunctive relief action challenging the City of Naples's alleged ultra vires act of confirming seventy-six parking space credits for the Olde Naples Building. The court reverses, holding that the trial court imp
• Wollschlaeger v. Governor of the State OF Fla.
  797 F.3d 859· 11th Cir.· 2015-07-28 ·cited 10×
  The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment and injunction, holding that Florida's Firearm Owners Privacy Act (the Act) does not facially violate the First or Fourteenth Amendments. The court found that the Act's provisions regard
• Hamilton v. Hamilton
  142 So. 3d 969· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-07-23 ·cited 10×
  A stepson appeals the denial of his motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and an order granting a temporary injunction in a dispute with his stepmother over a stock purchase agreement. The court held that while the parties' agreement included a Florida choice-of-law
• Detournay v. City OF Coral Gables
  127 So. 3d 869· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-12-04 ·cited 10×
  Homeowners sought declaratory judgment and injunction to compel the City of Coral Gables to prosecute enforcement actions against a property owner operating an illegal yacht basin. The court held that a city's discretion to prosecute, settle, or dismiss building and zoning enforc
• Neuteleers v. Patio Homeowners Ass'n, Inc.
  114 So. 3d 299· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-05-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court properly denied the motion to vacate the final judgment because the complaint stated a cause of action on its face, and the appellants' arguments for vacating the judgment were either waived, raised too late, or premature.
• MDS (Canada), Inc. v. Rad Source Techs., Inc.
  822 F. Supp. 2d 1263· S.D. Fla.· 2011-09-30 ·cited 10×
  The court found that the RS 3400 does not embody the patents licensed under the agreement, and thus Rad Source can market it, subject to a right of first negotiation. The non-compete provision expired by its own terms.
• Levin v. Commerce Energy, Inc.
  6th Cir.· 2010-06-01 ·cited 10×
• In re Managed Care Litigation
  595 F. Supp. 2d 1349· S.D. Fla.· 2009-01-28 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed and adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying dismissal of the ERISA claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but granting dismissal of state law claims due to ERISA preemption, and partially granting dismissal of the ADA's
• Roblor Mktg. Grp., Inc. v. GPS Indus., Inc.
  633 F. Supp. 2d 1341· S.D. Fla.· 2008-12-11 ·cited 10×
  The court granted defendants' motion to stay patent litigation pending the resolution of reexamination proceedings before the PTO, finding that a stay would not unduly prejudice the plaintiff and would simplify the issues in the litigation.
• Punch Clock, Inc. v. Smart Software Dev.
  553 F. Supp. 2d 1353· S.D. Fla.· 2008-04-07 ·cited 10×
  The court granted plaintiff's motion for default judgment, finding the defendant liable for federal trademark infringement, violations of the ACPA, and Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act due to willful infringement and consumer confusion.
• Post-Newsweek Stations Orlando, Inc. v. Guetzloe
  968 So. 2d 608· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-10-04 ·cited 10×
  A television station challenged a temporary injunction prohibiting it from broadcasting contents of documents obtained from a storage unit auction sale, arguing it violated the First Amendment's prohibition on prior restraints. The Florida appellate court reversed the injunction,
• Army Aviation Heritage Found. & Museum, Inc. v. Buis
  504 F. Supp. 2d 1254· N.D. Fla.· 2007-03-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove entitlement to general, special, or punitive damages for defamation, but was entitled to nominal damages based on the FDUTPA civil penalty scheme. Attorney's fees were denied as special damages.
• Taylor v. Steckel
  944 So. 2d 494· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-12-13 ·cited 10×
  Taylor, the seller of real property, appealed a trial court's denial of her motion to compel arbitration and the extension of a lis pendens filed by the buyer Steckel. The appellate court reversed the arbitration denial, finding that the broker consent requirement in the contract
• Siegel v. Bettie I. Whitaker
  946 So. 2d 1079· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-11-09 ·cited 10×
  In this marital settlement agreement dispute, the Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed judgment for the former wife in her claim to a construction defect lawsuit against the contractors of the marital home. The court held that the former husband's transfer of all his "right, t
• Gulf Power Co. v. Harper
  940 So. 2d 535· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-10-26 ·cited 10×
  Gulf Power Company appealed a summary judgment order declaring that Gulf Power exceeded the scope of its easement rights. The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the summary judgment on the declaratory judgment claim was not final and appealable because other related claims
• JES Props., Inc. v. USA Equestrian, Inc.
  432 F. Supp. 2d 1283· M.D. Fla.· 2006-03-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that defendants are not entitled to attorneys' fees under the Florida Antitrust Act, Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, or Florida Statute § 768.79, but are entitled to taxable costs under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 54(d)(1) with certain reductions.