Interlocutory Injunction

127 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• B. W. Photo Utils. v. Republic Molding Corp.
  280 F.2d 806· 9th Cir.· 1960-07-15 ·cited 10×
  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.
• Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Polychrome Corp.
  267 F.2d 772· 7th Cir.· 1959-06-11 ·cited 10×
  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.
• Williams v. Williams
  939 So. 2d 1154· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-10-20 ·cited 8×
  The appellate court reviewed a trial court's order on a motion to enforce a mediation agreement in a divorce case. The appellate court affirmed the enforcement of the agreement but reversed the trial court's findings of duress and modification of the agreement regarding the marit
• Am. Motorists Ins. Co. v. Levolor Lorentzen, Inc.
  879 F.2d 1165· 3d Cir.· 1989-07-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's orders regarding the duty to defend were not final and therefore not appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, even with Rule 54(b) certification, because the determination of the pollution exclusion's applicability could alter the duty to defend
• Rowe v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co.
  421 F.2d 937· 4th Cir.· 1970-01-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion to file an amended and supplemental complaint alleging an assignment of the insured's claim against the insurer for bad faith refusal to settle.
• Alaska S.S. Co. v. Fed. Mar. Comm'n & United States
  356 F.2d 59· 9th Cir.· 1966-02-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the denial of the motion to reopen was not arbitrary or an abuse of discretion, and the application to adduce additional evidence was denied.
• Martin v. Reynolds Metals Co.
  336 F.2d 876· 9th Cir.· 1964-09-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appeal presented nothing for review due to the absence of a specification of errors in the appellant's brief.
• Charles Simkin & Sons, Inc. v. Massiah
  289 F.2d 26· 3d Cir.· 1961-04-13 ·cited 8×
  A contractual waiver of lien rights is enforceable even if the party seeking to enforce it is in default, and equitable replevin is not available for standard, non-unique chattels.
• Evening News Publ'g Co. v. Allied Newspaper Carriers OF NEW Jersey
  263 F.2d 715· 3d Cir.· 1959-02-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a concerted refusal by newspaper dealers to handle a newspaper, aimed at forcing the elimination of newsboys, constituted a group boycott and a per se violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, unreasonably restraining interstate commerce.
• Porter v. Meigs
  74 So. 2d 82· Fla.· 1954-07-30 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's reformation of property deeds, holding that the deeds should be reformed to describe all land owned by the Bayou Fish Company in Block 18 at the time of conveyance, rather than specifically including Lots 1 and 2, because the con
• Hinton v. Seaboard AIR Line R. Co.
  170 F.2d 892· 4th Cir.· 1948-11-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the pendency of a prior suit does not provide grounds for enjoining the prosecution of a separate, in personam action in another jurisdiction.
• Krug v. FOX
  161 F.2d 1013· 4th Cir.· 1947-05-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the seizure and operation of the coal mine by government officials was lawful under the War Labor Disputes Act and Executive Order, rendering the suit against them effectively a suit against the United States, which had not consented to be sued.
• Morton Salt Co. v. City of S. Hutchinson
  159 F.2d 897· 10th Cir.· 1947-02-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to enter a temporary injunction, as the plaintiff's property is subject to taxation for a public improvement even without direct benefit.
• In re Magnolia Marine Transp. Co., Inc. v. Laplace Towing Corp.
  964 F.2d 1571· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-25 ·cited 7×
  The dissenting judge believes the trial court correctly denied the motion to dismiss the declaratory judgment action and properly stayed state court proceedings related to the limitation of liability action.
• City OF Miami Beach v. Lansburgh
  217 So. 2d 348· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-01-07 ·cited 7×
  The court denied the city's petition for a constitutional writ to clarify the effect of its supersedeas, finding the city had not made a sufficient showing to justify such relief.
• Rorick v. Bd. of Com'rs of Everglades Drainage Dist.
  N.D. Fla.· 1932-04-13 ·cited 7×
  Legislation authorizing the issuance of drainage district bonds and imposing acreage taxes to pay them constitutes an irrepealable contract with bondholders that cannot be impaired by subsequent legislation reducing tax rates or diverting revenues to other purposes. The acreage t
• The Continuum Co., Inc. v. Incepts, Inc.
  873 F.2d 801· 5th Cir.· 1989-05-15 ·cited 6×
  The court continued the stay of the district court's order increasing the bond and dissolving the injunction, pending appeal.
• Manning v. Energy Conversion Devices, Inc.
  833 F.2d 1096· 2d Cir.· 1987-11-20 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's order compelling arbitration, finding that the appellants failed to present an adequate basis to oppose or vacate the order despite procedural irregularities.
• Graham v. Teledyne-Continental Motors
  805 F.2d 1386· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the NTSB did not abuse its discretion in denying the estate's representative participation in the engine teardown investigation, nor did it violate due process.
• Coal. FOR Safe Nuclear Power & Living in a Finer Env't v. United States Atomic Energy Comm'n & the United States Of Am.
  463 F.2d 954· D.C. Cir.· 1972-04-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the A.E.C. must consider the irretrievable commitment of resources in its decision to suspend construction pending a full N.E.P.A. review. The court also remanded the record to the agency with instructions for a timely decision.
• Shahidah Graham v. Minter
  437 F.2d 427· 1st Cir.· 1971-03-03 ·cited 6×
  The denial of a temporary restraining order by a single judge in a case requiring a three-judge court is not immediately appealable.
• Pac. Indem. Co. v. Acel Delivery Serv., Inc.
  432 F.2d 952· 5th Cir.· 1970-08-06 ·cited 6×
• Teamsters Local Union No. 769 v. Fontainebleau Hotel Corp.
  222 So. 2d 54· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-04-08 ·cited 6×
  Teamsters Local Union 769 appealed an interlocutory injunction restraining picketing at the Fontainebleau Hotel. The Florida appellate court affirmed the injunction, holding that the trial court had jurisdiction because no labor dispute existed and that the preliminary injunction
• Chas. Pfizer & Co., Inc. v. Zenith Labs., Inc.
  339 F.2d 429· 3d Cir.· 1964-12-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the lower court's order denying an injunction must be vacated because it failed to make specific findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by Rule 52(a).
• Federated Meat Corp. v. Reconstr. Fin. Corp.
  183 F.2d 588· Emer. Ct. App.· 1950-07-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) acted properly in invalidating past subsidy claims and withholding future payments pending judicial determination of price regulation violations. The regulation allowing such withholding is valid.
• Pacific Coast European Conference and its member lines v. Fed. Mar. Comm'n & United States
  537 F.2d 333· 9th Cir.· 1976-04-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Federal Maritime Commission did not overstep its authority by issuing a cease-and-desist order to the Pacific Coast European Conference regarding its dual-rate contracts, as the order was a valid interpretation of the Shipping Act and not an illegal injunc
• Weintraub v. Hanrahan
  435 F.2d 461· 7th Cir.· 1970-12-07 ·cited 4×
  A single judge cannot grant an interlocutory injunction in a case requiring a three-judge court, even if the injunction is granted before the three-judge court is convened.
• Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Volks City, Inc.
  348 F.2d 659· 3d Cir.· 1965-07-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction, and affirmed the order.
• Carey v. Carter
  344 F.2d 567· D.C. Cir.· 1965-03-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to make findings of fact and conclusions of law when denying a motion to stay proceedings pending exhaustion of contractual grievance procedures.
• Albuquerque Nat. Bank v. Citizens Nat. Bank in Abilene
  212 F.2d 943· 5th Cir.· 1954-05-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Texas federal district court erred in enjoining the New Mexico bank from prosecuting its will construction suit, as the New Mexico court's jurisdiction was not in conflict and its judgment would be persuasive. However, the Texas court did acquire jurisdict
• Fredericka Lucian v. THE S. Ohio Sav. Bank & Tr. Co.
  154 Fla. 442· Fla.· 1944-05-12 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court addresses whether a trial court had jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant in a divorce case where the defendant contested jurisdiction but actively participated in the litigation through counsel. The majority opinion (not provided) apparently held th
• Nathan Mayo as Commissioner of Agriculture v. Fla. Grapefruit Growers Protective Ass'n
  123 Fla. 277· Fla.· 1936-03-13 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court vacated a final decree and remanded the case for reconsideration in light of new legislation. The court noted that subsequent acts might have modified or repealed the statute under which the original decree was issued.
• Rorick v. Bd. of Com'rs of Everglades Drainage Dist.
  N.D. Fla.· 1928-07-07 ·cited 4×
  Bondholders of the Everglades Drainage District sought to enjoin the issuance of $20,000,000 in additional bonds authorized by a 1927 Florida statute, alleging that the new bonds would impair their contract rights under the original bond authorization. The district court held tha
• Dollar v. United States
  190 F.2d 547· 9th Cir.· 1951-06-22 ·cited 3×
  The court denied the motion to vacate, set aside, and stay the preliminary injunction, deferring a decision on the merits until the Supreme Court's action provides a more authoritative determination.
• Cimos Angelis v. Tarpon Springs Sponge Producers Assn.
  111 Fla. 740· Fla.· 1933-08-09 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed an interlocutory injunction issued by the lower court restraining Cimos Angelis from selling or disposing of sponges allegedly subject to a written marketing contract with the Tarpon Springs Sponge Producers Association. The Court held that the
• Pozsgay v. Sw. Ill. Health Facilities, Inc.
  924 F.2d 677· 7th Cir.· 1991-02-05 ·cited 2×
  A district court cannot dismiss a complaint without prejudice as to certain remedies when the plaintiff has voluntarily withdrawn those remedies from a case that is otherwise ready for final judgment.
• Superior Trucking Co., Inc. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  614 F.2d 481· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 18 does not require an oral hearing for applications for injunctions pending agency review, and therefore, no error was committed by entering an injunction without one.
• Va. Surface Mining & Reclamation Ass'n, Inc. v. Andrus
  604 F.2d 312· 4th Cir.· 1979-08-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred by applying an improper standard for granting an interlocutory injunction and by failing to consider congressional findings when enjoining enforcement of the Surface Mining Act.
• Mason v. DeGEORGE
  483 F.2d 521· 4th Cir.· 1973-08-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state failed to demonstrate irreparable harm, a necessary prerequisite for an interlocutory injunction.
• Preston v. United States Tr. Co. OF NEW York
  394 F.2d 456· 2d Cir.· 1968-04-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the grantor's ex-wife could validly consent to a reduction in trust corpus, but that a claim for reformation of a trust based on mutual mistake should not have been dismissed summarily.
• Valley Vision, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  D.D.C.· 1967-09-06 ·cited 2×
  The court transferred the appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, yielding to the statutory intent that an administrative action be reviewed in the circuit where proceedings were first instituted.
• United States v. A-l Meat Co., Inc.
  255 F.2d 491· 2d Cir.· 1958-05-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly granted summary judgment for the government because it lacked jurisdiction to review the validity of the administrative order demanding restitution of subsidy payments, and the appellant had ample opportunity to pursue administrati
• Harris v. Britton
  218 F.2d 45· D.C. Cir.· 1954-12-30 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the District Court's judgments, upholding the deputy commissioner's findings and orders regarding employer status and compensation defaults.
• Nat'l Lawyers Guild v. Brownell
  215 F.2d 485· D.C. Cir.· 1954-05-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction, as the appellant failed to show a clear error or irreparable harm that would justify bypassing administrative remedies.
• Harris v. Briscoe
  212 F.2d 619· D.C. Cir.· 1954-04-22 ·cited 2×
  An employer is entitled to supersedeas of a judgment entered under § 18 of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, as in civil suits at common law, unless another provision of the Act expressly forbids it.
• Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council of Orange Cnty. v. Le Baron
  181 F.2d 449· 9th Cir.· 1949-06-30 ·cited 2×
  The court denied the motion to suspend an injunction pending appeal, finding the arguments raised were either foreclosed by precedent or not properly before the court.
• Porter v. Ohio Fuel Gas Co.
  158 F.2d 814· 6th Cir.· 1947-01-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that automatic rate increases under pre-existing contracts were not subject to the notice and intervention requirements of the Stabilization Act, but new rate changes enacted after the Act's effective date were subject to these requirements.
• Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Rigby
  96 So. 3d 1146· Fla. 3d DCA· 2012-09-12 ·cited 1×
  Because Royal Caribbean failed to appeal an initial July 2009 order granting emergency maintenance and cure benefits and subsequently continued providing such benefits, the trial court properly entered a January 2010 order modifying the maintenance obligation to a $25 per diem, a
• Noble v. Carlton
  S.D. Fla.· 1930-01-04 ·cited 1×
  A Georgia milk producer challenged a Florida statute regulating milk sales as violating the Commerce Clause, Eighth Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment. The district court upheld the statute as a valid exercise of police power, finding the exemption for small producers reasonable
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Joint Apprenticeship Comm. OF the Joint Indus. Bd. OF the Elec. Indus.
  895 F.2d 86· 2d Cir.· 1990-01-31
  The court held that the district court's grant of partial summary judgment and injunction was based on an incorrect legal standard by failing to adequately address the causation element required for a prima facie case of disparate impact under Title VII, as clarified by Wards Cov