Irreparable Harm

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

• Lacaretta Rest. & Zenith Ins. Co. v. Engelds Zepeda
  115 So. 3d 1091· Fla. 1st DCA· 2013-06-24 ·cited 12×
  In a workers' compensation discovery dispute, the Florida First District Court of Appeal granted a petition for certiorari, quashing a Judge of Compensation Claims' discovery order that compelled disclosure of two internal notes. The court held that the notes were protected by at
• Stand UP FOR Animals, Inc. v. Monroe Cnty.
  69 So. 3d 1011· Fla. 3d DCA· 2011-09-14 ·cited 12×
  Stand Up for Animals, Inc. appealed from an order denying its motion to dissolve a prejudgment asset-freeze injunction freezing its bank accounts. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that a prejudgment injunction freezing bank assets is impermissible where the
• Dees v. The Kidney Grp., LLC
  16 So. 3d 277· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-08-26 ·cited 12×
  The appellate court held that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by granting a protective order without proper findings and that the petitioner demonstrated irreparable harm, warranting certiorari relief.
• Colonial Bank, N.A. v. Taylor Morrison Servs., Inc.
  10 So. 3d 653· Fla. 5th DCA· 2009-04-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in granting a temporary injunction because the party seeking it did not demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits.
• M.I. Indus. USA Inc. v. Attorneys' Title Ins. Fund, Inc.
  6 So. 3d 627· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-01-05 ·cited 12×
  M.I. Industries challenges an ex parte injunction freezing its bank accounts and assets pending litigation over alleged illegal land-flipping schemes involving a title insurance fund's member-agent. The court reverses, holding that injunctions freezing commingled bank accounts ar
• The Event Firm, LLC v. Augustin
  985 So. 2d 1174· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-07-02 ·cited 12×
  The Event Firm, LLC sought certiorari review of a trial court order disqualifying its counsel without an evidentiary hearing. The appellate court held that when material facts regarding an attorney-client relationship are disputed, a trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearin
• Allison v. Medlock
  983 So. 2d 789· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-06-18 ·cited 12×
  A Florida appellate court quashed an order requiring DNA testing in a paternity action where the father had signed a valid paternity affidavit four years prior and established a presumption of paternity. The court held that DNA testing cannot be ordered without clear and convinci
• Capco Props., LLC. v. Monterey Gardens OF Pinecrest Condo.
  982 So. 2d 1211· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-05-23 ·cited 12×
  The Third District Court of Appeal granted a writ of certiorari to review nonfinal discovery orders, quashing orders that compelled disclosure of six years of personal financial information from a condominium developer and its members where the complaint contained no claim for pu
• Dep't OF Child. & Families v. Jetty L. Wehrwein
  942 So. 2d 947· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-11-17 ·cited 12×
  The trial court's order committing Wehrwein to DCF custody violated statutory requirements for involuntary commitment of an incompetent defendant.
• Wade v. Brown
  928 So. 2d 1260· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-05-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a temporary injunction was improperly granted because the record failed to demonstrate irreparable harm.
• Dep't OF Child. & Families v. Clem
  903 So. 2d 1011· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-06-10 ·cited 12×
  The Florida Department of Children and Families sought certiorari review of a trial court order finding Robert Clem incompetent to stand trial and committing him to DCF custody. The Fifth District Court of Appeal denied the petition, holding that one expert's opinion supporting i
• Rydell v. Gorham Rutter, Jr.
  834 So. 2d 883· Fla. 5th DCA· 2002-12-06 ·cited 12×
  Certiorari review of a pre-trial order awarding attorney's fees and costs is inappropriate at this stage because the plaintiffs have not demonstrated irreparable harm.
• Soud v. Kendale, Inc.
  788 So. 2d 1051· Fla. 1st DCA· 2001-04-26 ·cited 12×
  The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed a temporary injunction granted ex parte against the Jacksonville City Council, holding that the trial court failed to comply with Rule 1.610(a) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires certification of notice effo
• First Miami Sec., Inc. v. Bell
  758 So. 2d 1229· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-05-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a temporary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and a likelihood of success on the merits.
• Smithers v. Smithers
  743 So. 2d 605· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-10-13 ·cited 12×
• Sony Music Ent., Inc. v. Global Arts Prods.
  45 F. Supp. 2d 1345· S.D. Fla.· 1999-01-14 ·cited 12×
  The court granted a permanent injunction against defendants for copyright infringement due to their default and contumacious conduct.
• Edgar v. Cape Coral Med. Ctr., Inc.
  712 So. 2d 1209· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-06-24 ·cited 12×
  An interlocutory appeal of a stay order is not proper unless the order has an injunctive component; review is only available by writ of certiorari.
• Cargill v. Sunlight Foods
  586 So. 2d 366· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-06-18 ·cited 12×
  Cargill appeals the trial court's denial of its motion to dissolve an injunction blocking payment on a letter of credit and to increase the injunction bond. The court reversed, holding that Sunlight failed to establish the requisite elements for injunctive relief and that the doc
• JSG Trading Corp. v. Tray-Wrap, Inc.
  917 F.2d 75· 2d Cir.· 1990-09-26 ·cited 12×
  The Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA) does not require a buyer to segregate trust assets, and a seller seeking a preliminary injunction must meet traditional standards, including showing a likelihood of irreparable harm.
• Pretty Punch Shoppettes, Inc. v. Marge Hauk
  844 F.2d 782· Fed. Cir.· 1988-04-21 ·cited 12×
  The appellate court held that the trial court's denial of a preliminary injunction must be vacated and remanded because it failed to make sufficient findings of fact as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a).
• Morton v. Beyer
  822 F.2d 364· 3d Cir.· 1987-06-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the employee likely demonstrated a procedural due process violation under Loudermill, he failed to show irreparable harm, thus the preliminary injunction was improperly granted.
• Patton v. Dole
  806 F.2d 24· 2d Cir.· 1986-11-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a preliminary injunction and dismissing the complaint, as the plaintiff raised serious questions regarding the interpretation of his service obligation agreement.
• Rodriguez v. Banco Central
  790 F.2d 172· 1st Cir.· 1986-05-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an order deferring class certification pending a test case is not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine because the asserted rights are capable of vindication on appeal from a final judgment.
• Datascope Corp. v. Kontron Inc.
  786 F.2d 398· Fed. Cir.· 1986-03-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction for the dual lumen IAB device.
• Dixon v. Heckler
  785 F.2d 1102· 2d Cir.· 1986-03-07 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of a preliminary injunction against the Secretary's use of "severity regulations" in evaluating disability benefits, finding the regulations likely inconsistent with the Social Security Act.
• In re Martin-Trigona v. Olympic Worldwide Commc'ns, Inc.
  763 F.2d 135· 2d Cir.· 1985-06-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an order for specific performance, which did not cause irreparable harm and was not certified under Rule 54(b), is not a final appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
• Am. Ass'n OF Exporters & Importers-Textile & Apparel Grp. v. The United States
  751 F.2d 1239· Fed. Cir.· 1985-01-04 ·cited 12×
  The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision, holding that the Court of International Trade had jurisdiction and that the appellant lacked standing to challenge the agency's actions based on statutory interpretation and APA violations.
• DeLEON v. Susquehanna Cmty. Sch. Dist.
  747 F.2d 149· 3d Cir.· 1984-10-30 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction and the entry of final judgment, but only because the appellants failed to raise the issue of improper consolidation of the preliminary injunction hearing with the trial on the merits.
• Vogel v. Am. Soc'y OF Appraisers
  744 F.2d 598· 7th Cir.· 1984-09-20 ·cited 12×
  The denial of a preliminary injunction is affirmed because the plaintiff has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits regarding the antitrust claims.
• Allegra Enters., Inc. v. Fairchild
  455 So. 2d 1073· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-09-05 ·cited 12×
• Florida Communities Hutchinson Island v. Arabia
  452 So. 2d 1131· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-07-18 ·cited 12×
  The trial court erred by denying the motion to dissolve the lis pendens without requiring the respondents to post an indemnity bond, as the action was not founded on a duly recorded instrument.
• Am. AIR Parcel Forwarding Co., Ltd. v. United States: the Sec'y of the Treas.
  718 F.2d 1546· Fed. Cir.· 1983-10-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Court of International Trade correctly dismissed the importers' action for lack of jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(h) and (i), as importers failed to exhaust administrative remedies and meet the requirements for residual or pre-importation review.
• SAN Francisco Real Est. Invs. v. Real Est. Inv. Tr. OF Am.
  692 F.2d 814· 1st Cir.· 1982-11-09 ·cited 12×
  A district court's temporary restraining order extending a tender offer's proration date is improper and appealable if it functions as a preliminary injunction.
• Punnett v. Carter
  621 F.2d 578· 3d Cir.· 1980-05-13 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm.
• Soldevila v. Sec'y OF Agric. OF the United States
  512 F.2d 427· 1st Cir.· 1975-03-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the appellee failed to demonstrate extraordinary harm and had not exhausted administrative remedies.
• Adele Proetta v. Dent
  484 F.2d 1146· 2d Cir.· 1973-09-19 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction against the City and the EDA, finding insufficient nexus between the City and EDA for NEPA violations and no showing of irreparable harm for the EDA injunction.
• Ronson Corp. v. Liquifin Aktiengesellschaft
  483 F.2d 846· 3d Cir.· 1973-07-24 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction, finding no reversible error in its conclusion that the plaintiff met its burden under Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
• Am. Metro. Enters. OF NEW York, Inc. v. Warner Bros. Records, Inc.
  389 F.2d 903· 2d Cir.· 1968-02-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction is not warranted for mechanical music copyrights once the owner has acquiesced in their use, as exclusivity is lost and irreparable harm is not presumed.
• Harris v. Gibson
  322 F.2d 780· 5th Cir.· 1963-09-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court's order continuing a temporary restraining order was an appealable interlocutory order and granted an injunction pending appeal to allow student transfers.
• Eastern Greyhound Lines (A Division of the Greyhound Corporation) v. Fusco
  310 F.2d 632· 6th Cir.· 1962-12-04 ·cited 12×
  The court denied the motion for an injunction pending appeal, finding no present threat of irreparable injury and insufficient grounds to deviate from standard review procedures.
• Celebrity, Inc. v. Trina, Inc.
  264 F.2d 956· 1st Cir.· 1959-03-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate compelling equities and irreparable harm.
• Hannan v. City OF Haverhill
  120 F.2d 87· 1st Cir.· 1941-05-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the denial of an interlocutory injunction was not an abuse of discretion because the plaintiffs had not demonstrated irreparable harm or applied for a permit.
• Brown v. Sec'y, U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
  4 F.4th 1220· 11th Cir.· 2021-07-14 ·cited 11×
  Landlords challenged a CDC eviction moratorium issued during the COVID-19 pandemic, arguing it exceeded the agency's statutory authority under 42 U.S.C. § 264(a) and that they would suffer irreparable harm from insolvent tenants unable to repay unpaid rent. The Eleventh Circuit a
• Kratos Holdings, LLC v. Direct Invs. Int'l, LLC
  46 Fla. L. Weekly D779· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-06-23 ·cited 11×
  A partial summary judgment that authorizes immediate execution of a monetary award while leaving intertwined factual matters unresolved constitutes irreparable harm remediable by writ of certiorari. Such execution must be quashed pending resolution of all related claims.
• Millennium Diagnostic Imaging Ctr., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
  129 So. 3d 1086· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-09-30 ·cited 11×
  Millennium Diagnostic Imaging Center petitioned for a writ of prohibition or certiorari to challenge a circuit court discovery order issued by State Farm under Florida's PIP statute. The Florida Court of Appeal denied both petitions, holding that prohibition cannot revoke an alre
• Manatee Cnty. v. 1187 Upper James OF Fla., LLC
  104 So. 3d 1118· Fla. 2d DCA· 2012-11-16 ·cited 11×
  Manatee County appealed the denial of its motion for a temporary injunction requiring a restaurant to comply with entertainment restrictions in a county ordinance. The Second District reversed, holding that the County established a likelihood of success on the merits and that the
• Jacquelyn Bennett and Bobbi Sue Miller v. Marie-Christine Berges
  84 So. 3d 373· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-03-14 ·cited 11×
  The petition for certiorari review of an order compelling an in camera inspection of documents claimed to be protected by attorney-client privilege is denied as premature.
• A.G. v. Fla. Dep't OF Child. & Families
  65 So. 3d 1180· Fla. 1st DCA· 2011-07-26 ·cited 11×
  A father appeals a shelter order placing his newborn child with the maternal grandmother, arguing the order violated his due process right to counsel because he was not represented at the shelter hearing and the trial court failed to inform him of this right or obtain a waiver. T
• T. Stevens Felger, M.D. and North Florida Surgeons, P. A. v. Mock
  65 So. 3d 625· Fla. 1st DCA· 2011-07-26 ·cited 11×
  A medical malpractice defendant petitioned for certiorari to overturn a trial court order vacating an arbitration award in its favor and ordering a new arbitration hearing. The court held that application of an incorrect legal standard by arbitrators does not constitute grounds f
• State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. Puig
  62 So. 3d 23· Fla. 3d DCA· 2011-03-23 ·cited 11×
  State Farm petitioned for certiorari to quash a trial court order compelling production of its entire claim file in a first-party bad faith action. The Third District Court of Appeal granted the petition in part, holding that while work product materials prepared before resolutio