Irreparable Harm

2,255 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• The Regents OF the Univ. OF Cal. v. Am. Broad. Cos., Inc.
  747 F.2d 511· 9th Cir.· 1984-11-09 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the district court's issuance of a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiffs had raised serious questions regarding the legality of the defendants' antitrust violations and that the balance of hardships favored the plaintiffs.
• Union Carbide Corp. v. UGI Corp.
  731 F.2d 1186· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court properly asserted personal jurisdiction over Sutton and did not abuse its discretion in issuing the preliminary injunction.
• Hotelerama Assocs., Ltd. v. Bystrom
  449 So. 2d 836· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-02-28 ·cited 14×
  The trial court erred by ruling on the merits of the tax assessment dispute when considering a motion for a temporary injunction.
• Parker v. Gordon
  442 So. 2d 273· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-11-23 ·cited 14×
  Audrey Oliver Parker appealed the dismissal of her complaint against a law firm and its associates for alleged misconduct in representing her and co-owners in a real property transaction dispute. Although the trial court erred in dismissing the case for failure to prosecute under
• Rockwell Int'l Sys., Inc. v. Citibank, N.A.
  719 F.2d 583· 2d Cir.· 1983-10-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction was appropriate to prevent demands on letters of credit where there was a high probability of fraud in the transaction, and the availability of other forums for relief was uncertain.
• Palm Beach-Martin Cnty. Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Robert J. Panaro, M.D.
  431 So. 2d 1023· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-04-20 ·cited 14×
  The Court held that the District Court's order staying proceedings pending state court litigation was a final, appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
• Sierra Club v. Hennessy
  695 F.2d 643· 2d Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by issuing a permanent injunction without properly balancing the equities and finding irreparable harm, reversing the injunction against FHWA reimbursement.
• The United States v. Uniroyal, Inc.
  687 F.2d 467· C.C.P.A.· 1982-09-02 ·cited 14×
  The Court of Appeals held that the Court of International Trade lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review a Customs Service internal advice ruling because the importer failed to exhaust administrative remedies by filing a protest.
• Midway Mfg. Co. v. Omni Video Games, Inc.
  668 F.2d 70· 1st Cir.· 1981-12-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that it lacked appellate jurisdiction because the issues presented did not pose a threat of irreparable harm.
• Medtronic v. Catalyst Research Corp.
  664 F.2d 660· 8th Cir.· 1981-11-06 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the grant of a preliminary injunction prohibiting CRC from enjoining Medtronic's production of lithium-iodine batteries, finding the balance of equities favored Medtronic, despite a differing preliminary assessment of the likelihood of success on the merits.
• Smith v. Roscoe L. Eggar
  655 F.2d 181· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction and that the Commissioner could not rescind the agreement based on the taxpayer's removal of papers from a bank vault, as the agreement was not ambiguous and the removal did not violate its terms.
• Coal. FOR Basic Human Needs v. King
  654 F.2d 838· 1st Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that it had appellate jurisdiction to review the denial of a TRO, and granted an injunction pending appeal requiring the state to resume AFDC payments, finding a likelihood of success on the statutory claim.
• S. J. Stile Assocs. Ltd. v. Snyder
  646 F.2d 522· C.C.P.A.· 1981-04-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying a preliminary injunction because the brokers failed to demonstrate a sufficient showing of irreparable harm and the public interest favored implementing the Customs Service's corrective action.
• Kemlon Prods. & Dev. Co. v. United States
  638 F.2d 1315· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-12 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act barred the injunction because the taxpayer failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and the government showed a likelihood of prevailing on its right to disclose information for tax investigation.
• Pingree v. Portia Elaine Quaintance
  394 So. 2d 161· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-02-11 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services appealed a trial court's summary judgment ordering it to comply with statutory requirements for judicial review of children in foster care. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Section 409.168 creates a mandatory
• Chartwell Commc'ns Grp. v. Westbrook
  637 F.2d 459· 6th Cir.· 1980-12-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that over-the-air subscription television (STV) is not 'broadcasting' for the use of the general public under Section 605 of the Communications Act, and therefore its unauthorized interception is prohibited, and an implied private right of action exists under the s
• Harvey v. Wittenberg
  384 So. 2d 940· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-06-17 ·cited 14×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed a temporary injunction against Harvey and Monroy for unlawful practice of dentistry. The court held that irreparable harm is presumed when a statute is designed to protect the public interest and specifically authorizes injunctive rel
• Nat'l Rejectors Indus. v. United Steelworkers OF Am.
  562 F.2d 1069· 8th Cir.· 1977-08-30 ·cited 14×
  The dissent argues that the majority erred in authorizing injunctive relief, as the dispute was procedural and not directly related to an arbitrable issue, and the employer failed to demonstrate irreparable harm.
• Barrett v. Smith
  530 F.2d 829· 9th Cir.· 1975-12-12 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a pre-termination hearing is not constitutionally required for public employees in all circumstances, and the appellant failed to establish a likelihood of prevailing on the merits or suffering irreparable harm.
• Chris-Craft Indus., Inc. v. Bangor Punta Corp. & David W. Wallace
  426 F.2d 569· 2d Cir.· 1970-04-28 ·cited 14×
  The court affirms the denial of a preliminary injunction.
• H. E. Fletcher Co. v. Rock OF Ages Corp.
  326 F.2d 13· 2d Cir.· 1963-12-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was improvidently issued because the plaintiff did not demonstrate sufficient irreparable harm or likelihood of success on the merits under Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
• Bhd. OF Locomotive Eng'rs v. The Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co.
  310 F.2d 513· 7th Cir.· 1962-11-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act did not deprive the district court of the power to grant an injunction pending appeal, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in doing so.
• Galencare, Inc. v. Bayfront HMA Med. Ctr, LLC
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-01-02 ·cited 13×
  A competitor hospital seeking a temporary injunction against a rival's provisional trauma center operations failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits because the statutory framework does not require the Department to consider whether trauma center posi
• CVS Caremark Corp. & Gallagher Bassett Servs., Inc. v. Latour
  109 So. 3d 1232· Fla. 1st DCA· 2013-03-28 ·cited 13×
  In this workers' compensation case, the Florida First District Court of Appeal granted a petition for writ of certiorari to review an order denying a protective order that would have required a corporate representative (adjuster) to be deposed in the county where the workers' com
• Wal-Mart Stores E., L.P. v. Shelia Endicott and her husband Dan Endicott
  81 So. 3d 486· Fla. 1st DCA· 2011-12-09 ·cited 13×
  Wal-Mart sought certiorari review of a protective order containing a "sharing provision" that would allow opposing counsel to disseminate confidential discovery materials and trade secrets to attorneys in collateral litigation involving similar prescription error claims. The Flor
• Laser Spine Inst., LLC v. Haval M. Makanast
  69 So. 3d 1045· Fla. 2d DCA· 2011-09-21 ·cited 13×
  The trial court must ensure a protective order or confidentiality agreement is in place before compelling the production of trade secrets.
• State v. Torry M. Jones
  30 So. 3d 619· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-03-12 ·cited 13×
  The State of Florida petitioned for a writ of certiorari to overturn a trial court's pretrial order excluding urinalysis test results from evidence in a sexual offense case. Although the appellate court found the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by excl
• State v. Rambaran
  975 So. 2d 519· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-01-23 ·cited 13×
  The State sought certiorari review of a trial court's order severing counts 4 and 5 (attempted murders) from the main indictment and excluding evidence of those events as collateral crimes evidence. The Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District, granted the petition and qu
• Randolph v. Antioch Farms Feed & Grain Corp.
  903 So. 2d 384· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-06-17 ·cited 13×
  Appellants Randolph appealed from a temporary injunction order granted in favor of Antioch Farms Feed & Grain Corp. and Tony Sills. The appellate court affirmed the injunction but remanded for the trial court to enter proper factual findings and set an appropriate bond, as requir
• Whitener v. First Union Nat'l Bank OF Fla.
  901 So. 2d 366· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-05-06 ·cited 13×
  Jane Whitener sought certiorari review of a trial court order disqualifying her replacement counsel in a breach of fiduciary duty action against her father's trustee. The Fifth District Court of Appeal granted the writ, quashed the disqualification order, and held that replacemen
• Charlotte Cnty. v. Richard Vetter for the Charlotte Cnty. Park of Commerce, LLC
  863 So. 2d 465· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-01-21 ·cited 13×
  Charlotte County challenges a preliminary injunction requiring it to approve subdivision and site plan applications for an industrial park near the county airport. The court affirms the preliminary injunction to the extent it requires the county to expeditiously process permit ap
• Shell Oil Co. v. Altina Assocs., Inc.
  866 F. Supp. 536· M.D. Fla.· 1994-07-19 ·cited 13×
  The court held that federal courts have jurisdiction over franchisor actions under the PMPA, and granted a preliminary injunction because the franchisor demonstrated likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
• Grant v. Robert Half Int'l, Inc.
  597 So. 2d 801· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-04-14 ·cited 13×
  Grant, a former employee of Robert Half International, challenged a temporary injunction preventing him from competing with his former employer after starting a rival recruiting firm. The court affirmed the injunction, finding Robert Half demonstrated sufficient irreparable harm
• Diginet v. W. Union ATS
  958 F.2d 1388· 7th Cir.· 1992-03-09 ·cited 13×
  The court should certify issues of state law to the Illinois Supreme Court rather than deciding them itself.
• Artist M. v. Johnson
  917 F.2d 980· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-29 ·cited 13×
  The 'reasonable efforts' clause of the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 is too ambiguous to create an enforceable right under the Act or § 1983.
• Gen. Elec. Co. v. NEW York State Dep't OF Labor
  891 F.2d 25· 2d Cir.· 1989-11-29 ·cited 13×
  The dissent argues that New York's prevailing wage law is not preempted by ERISA because it regulates labor costs and only incidentally affects employee benefit plans.
• Plaza Health Labs., Inc. v. Perales
  878 F.2d 577· 2d Cir.· 1989-06-21 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Plaza's motion for a preliminary injunction, as Plaza failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of its due process and ex post facto claims.
• Davis v. Lansing
  851 F.2d 72· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-30 ·cited 13×
  The court held that federal courts should abstain from interfering with pending state criminal prosecutions absent a showing of great and immediate irreparable harm or prosecutorial bad faith.
• AMP Inc. v. Fleischhacker
  823 F.2d 1199· 7th Cir.· 1987-07-16 ·cited 13×
  The court held that without an enforceable restrictive covenant, generalized confidential business information does not constitute a trade secret under Illinois law, and absent evidence of actual misappropriation or likelihood thereof, injunctive relief is not warranted.
• Deaver v. Seymour
  822 F.2d 66· D.C. Cir.· 1987-06-15 ·cited 13×
  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Michael Deaver's request for a preliminary injunction to prevent independent counsel from seeking an indictment.
• Maxim's Ltd. v. Badonsky
  772 F.2d 388· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-12 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the denial of a preliminary injunction was not an abuse of discretion because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a clear probability of success on the merits and the balance of harms did not sufficiently favor the plaintiff.
• United Feature Syndicate, Inc. v. Sunrise Mold Co.
  569 F. Supp. 1475· S.D. Fla.· 1983-08-29 ·cited 13×
  The court held that defendants willfully infringed plaintiff's copyrights by manufacturing and selling unauthorized PEANUTS character molds, and were liable for statutory damages, attorney fees, costs, and punitive damages.
• Gilley v. United States
  649 F.2d 449· 6th Cir.· 1981-05-27 ·cited 13×
  The court held that a tenured federal employee seeking to enjoin a transfer pending administrative appeal must meet stringent standards for irreparable harm, and that the claimed inconveniences and difficulties in pursuing an appeal do not constitute irreparable injury sufficient
• Al-Kim, Inc. v. The United States
  650 F.2d 944· 9th Cir.· 1979-10-11 ·cited 13×
  Third parties whose property is levied upon to satisfy another's tax liability cannot contest the merits of the tax assessment under 26 U.S.C. § 6213, but may seek relief under 26 U.S.C. § 7426 if the levy was wrongful.
• Rosenblum v. United States
  549 F.2d 1140· 8th Cir.· 1977-02-02 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action because the taxpayers' constitutional claim regarding denial of counsel due to seizure of funds must be raised in the Tax Court, and the law firm's claim for wrongful levy under 26 U.S.C. § 7426 was not support
• Kirk v. Baumann
  336 So. 2d 125· Fla. 2d DCA· 1976-07-09 ·cited 13×
  A notice of lis pendens cannot be filed without a prior court order if the action is not founded on a duly recorded instrument or mechanic's lien.
• Washington v. Walker
  529 F.2d 1062· 7th Cir.· 1976-02-04 ·cited 13×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm, or an inadequate legal remedy, and that the balance of hardships did not favor granting the injunction.
• Govette v. C.A. No. 2019-0139-Sg Elec. Referral Manager, Inc.
  Del. Ch.· 2021-06-07 ·cited 12×
  The Court of Chancery denied the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, finding that while the Plaintiff's procedural missteps and the allegations in prior pleadings were concerning, they did not rise to the level of misconduct or tactical maneuve
• Amelio v. Marilyn Pines Unit II Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  173 So. 3d 1037· Fla. 2d DCA· 2015-07-15 ·cited 12×
  Unit owners appealed the denial of a mandatory injunction against their condominium association for failing to repair moisture intrusion through the building's floor slab. The appellate court reversed, holding that the owners satisfied all requirements for mandatory injunctive re
• Racetrac Petroleum, Inc. v. Sewell
  150 So. 3d 1247· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-11-19 ·cited 12×
  RaceTrac sought certiorari review to quash a trial court order compelling depositions of three high-level corporate officers (Hunter, Lenker, and Bolch) in a negligence case arising from a car accident at a RaceTrac gas station. The court held that Florida Rule of Civil Procedure