Irreparable Harm

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

• Safeco Ins. Co. OF Ill. v. Earle Rader, Jr.
  132 So. 3d 941· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-02-21 ·cited 18×
  Safeco Insurance sought a writ of certiorari to prevent a trial court from allowing an insured to amend his complaint to add a bad faith claim alongside his underinsured motorist (UM) coverage claim. The Florida appellate court denied the petition, holding that Safeco failed to d
• William O. Murtagh, M.D. v. Hurley
  40 So. 3d 62· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-07-07 ·cited 18×
  Dr. Murtagh sought a temporary injunction to prevent his former patient Hurley from making allegedly defamatory statements to his patients and prospective patients, claiming tortious interference with business relationships. The court held that while injunctive relief is availabl
• Aerospace Welding, Inc. v. Southstream Exhaust & Welding, Inc.
  824 So. 2d 226· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-07-24 ·cited 18×
  Aerospace Welding appeals from the dissolution of a temporary injunction and an award of attorney's fees to the defendant. The court affirmed, holding that the original injunction order violated Florida Rules of Civil Procedure by failing to specify reasons for entry and describe
• Mayor's Jewelers, Inc. v. State of Cal. Pub. Emps'. Ret. Sys.
  685 So. 2d 904· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-12-11 ·cited 18×
  The court reversed a decision regarding a landlord's potential entitlement to a mandatory injunction for specific performance of a continuous operations clause, and addressed the landlord's right to liquidated damages in lieu of percentage rent.
• Dep't OF Cmty. Affairs v. Holmes Cnty.
  668 So. 2d 1096· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-03-05 ·cited 18×
  Holmes County and Washington County sought to enjoin the Florida Department of Community Affairs from distributing federal disaster relief funds to Leon County, Wakulla County, and Tallahassee without allowing the plaintiff counties to compete for the funds. The appellate court r
• Hutchinson v. Kimzay OF Fla., Inc.
  637 So. 2d 942· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-05-27 ·cited 18×
  A landlord appealed orders granting temporary injunctions that prevented him from pursuing eviction and claiming damages against his tenant over a lease rent dispute. The Florida appellate court reversed both injunctive orders, finding they failed to comply with the procedural re
• GACHÉ v. First Union Nat'l Bank OF Fla.
  625 So. 2d 86· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-09-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a post-judgment order initiating a charging order proceeding is not reviewable by certiorari or as a non-final order under Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(a)(4).
• de Leon v. Aerochago, S.A.
  593 So. 2d 558· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-01-28 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion to dissolve the temporary injunction because the appellees failed to demonstrate a clear legal right and the likelihood of irreparable harm, as they had an adequate remedy at law.
• Sparks v. The Charles Wayne Grp.
  568 So. 2d 512· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-10-19 ·cited 18×
  The Sparks sought certiorari review of a trial court order discharging their lis pendens filed against property they contracted to purchase from the Charles Wayne Group. The court reversed, holding that non-defaulting purchasers under executory real estate contracts have an equit
• Pub. Interest Research Grp. OF NEW Jersey, Inc. v. Powell Duffryn Terminals Inc.
  913 F.2d 64· 3d Cir.· 1990-08-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' alleged injuries were not sufficiently traceable to the defendant's specific discharge to establish constitutional standing, despite the defendant's egregious pollution record.
• United States v. BNS Inc.
  858 F.2d 456· 9th Cir.· 1988-09-15 ·cited 18×
• Ecri v. McGRAW-Hill, Inc.
  809 F.2d 223· 3d Cir.· 1987-01-20 ·cited 18×
  A preliminary injunction enforcing a contract cannot stand if the party seeking it fails to demonstrate irreparable harm, especially when the contract contains termination provisions that limit the scope of potential injury.
• Appeal of Licht & Semonoff
  796 F.2d 564· 1st Cir.· 1986-07-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that an interlocutory appeal of a discovery sanction order against an attorney is not a final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, nor does it meet the criteria for the collateral order exception or a writ of mandamus.
• Golden v. Pac. Mar. Ass'n
  786 F.2d 1425· 9th Cir.· 1986-04-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a federal court may enjoin a state court action under the relitigation exception of the Anti-Injunction Act if the issues have been fairly and fully litigated in federal court and the state action threatens to relitigate those issues.
• Kaplan v. The Bd. OF Educ. OF the City Sch. Dist. OF the City OF NEW York
  759 F.2d 256· 2d Cir.· 1985-04-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court properly denied appellants' motion for a preliminary injunction because they failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or a likelihood of success on the merits.
• O'Brien v. Town OF Caledonia
  748 F.2d 403· 7th Cir.· 1984-11-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm due to the chilling effect on his First Amendment rights.
• Jaimot v. Media Leasing Corp.
  457 So. 2d 529· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-09-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the complaint sufficiently stated fraud as part of a breach of contract claim, and that the punitive damages claim was an interlocutory matter not subject to immediate review.
• Ferry-Morse Seed Co. v. Food Corn, Inc.
  729 F.2d 589· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-19 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction ordering the defendant to deliver seed corn, finding no abuse of discretion in granting the injunction.
• Maram v. Universidad Interamericana de Puerto RICO, Inc.
  722 F.2d 953· 1st Cir.· 1983-12-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the National Labor Relations Board's application for a preliminary injunction, finding reasonable cause to believe an unfair labor practice occurred and that an injunction was just and proper.
• Islandia Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Vermut
  438 So. 2d 89· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-09-07 ·cited 18×
  Florida appellate court reversed a preliminary injunction preventing a condominium association from repainting a unit's exterior, holding that the trial court failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or inadequate remedy at law required for such extraordinary relief.
• Martin v. Orrin L. Helstad
  699 F.2d 387· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-02 ·cited 18×
  A potential law school student who procures acceptance through fraudulent misrepresentations does not possess a constitutionally protected property interest in attending the university.
• Medtronic, Inc. v. Gibbons
  684 F.2d 565· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-23 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the grant of a preliminary injunction, holding that the district court did not err in applying Minnesota law to the restrictive covenant and in finding a threat of irreparable harm.
• Menominee Rubber Co. v. Gould, Inc.
  657 F.2d 164· 7th Cir.· 1981-08-21 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the grant of a preliminary injunction, finding no clear abuse of discretion by the district court in preserving the status quo pending trial.
• Fed. Leasing, Inc. v. Underwriters AT Lloyd's
  650 F.2d 495· 4th Cir.· 1981-06-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction requiring the underwriters to process insurance claims according to a prior agreement, balancing the severe financial harm to the insured against the minimal harm to the under
• Union Carbide Agric. Prods. Co., Inc. v. Costle
  632 F.2d 1014· 2d Cir.· 1980-09-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the appellees failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, particularly concerning the complex Fifth Amendment taking claims and the availability of a Tucker Act remedy.
• Providence Journal Co. v. Fed. Bureau OF Investigation
  595 F.2d 889· 1st Cir.· 1979-02-20 ·cited 18×
  The court granted the defendants' motions for a stay pending appeal, finding that the balance of hardship favored the issuance of a stay.
• Quadomain Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Pomerantz
  341 So. 2d 1041· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-01-21 ·cited 18×
  A condominium association appealed an interlocutory order granting a temporary injunction without bond to prevent termination of a management agreement that had guaranteed limited increases in owners' common expenses. The appellate court reversed, finding the injunction improvide
• Chicago Stadium Corp. v. Scallen
  530 F.2d 204· 8th Cir.· 1976-02-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
• Citizens FOR A Better Env't v. City OF Park Ridge
  567 F.2d 689· 7th Cir.· 1975-09-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction against an ordinance prohibiting door-to-door charitable solicitation, as it likely violated the First Amendment.
• Am. Med. Ass'n v. Caspar W. Weinberger
  522 F.2d 921· 7th Cir.· 1975-07-22 ·cited 18×
• SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp.
  507 F.2d 358· 2d Cir.· 1974-11-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying SCM's motion for a preliminary injunction, as SCM failed to make a sufficient showing of irreparable harm and the requested relief would alter the status quo.
• Michael and Cynthia Pride v. The Cmty. Sch. Bd. OF Brooklyn
  482 F.2d 257· 2d Cir.· 1973-06-18 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on their equal protection claims or irreparable harm.
• Hammond v. Brown
  450 F.2d 480· 6th Cir.· 1971-10-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that appellants failed to demonstrate bad faith prosecution or irreparable harm, thus equitable relief was inappropriate, and affirmed the district court's decision regarding expungement of the grand jury report.
• Miami Dade Coll. v. Del Pino Allen
  2020 WL 5506445· Fla. 3d DCA· 2019-04-24 ·cited 17×
  Before requiring the head of a state agency to testify, a trial court must find that the party seeking testimony has exhausted all discovery tools and that the testimony sought is necessary and unavailable from other witnesses. The trial court departed from the essential requirem
• Eutsay v. State
  103 So. 3d 181· Fla. 1st DCA· 2012-08-08 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a petition for writ of certiorari to quash an order denying a motion to compel discovery must demonstrate irreparable harm, which is generally not present when the alleged harm can be remedied on appeal.
• Cordis Corp. & Johnson & Johnson of N.J., Inc. v. O'Shea
  988 So. 2d 1163· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-08-06 ·cited 17×
  Cordis Corporation and Johnson & Johnson sought certiorari review to prevent O'Shea's counsel from disclosing confidential discovery documents to attorneys not involved in the underlying medical products liability case or collateral litigation. The Florida Fourth District Court o
• State v. Brown
  980 So. 2d 590· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-04-30 ·cited 17×
  The Bankruptcy Code's stamp tax exemption applies only to transfers made under a plan that has already been confirmed by the bankruptcy court at the time of the transfer.
• Progressive Select Ins. Co. v. Shockley
  951 So. 2d 20· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-02-07 ·cited 17×
• Autozone Stores, Inc. v. Ne. Plaza Venture, LLC.
  934 So. 2d 670· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-08-09 ·cited 17×
  AutoZone appeals a declaratory judgment that denied it injunctive relief for a landlord's alleged violation of a lease provision restricting development on adjacent property, holding that AutoZone had an adequate remedy at law in damages. The court reversed, holding that a tenant
• Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Lease Am., Inc.
  735 So. 2d 560· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-06-09 ·cited 17×
  Liberty Mutual Insurance Company sought certiorari review of a discovery sanctions order requiring production of documents it claimed were privileged. The court granted the petition in part, holding that while Liberty Mutual failed to timely assert privilege claims, it could stil
• City OF Oviedo v. Alafaya Utils., Inc.
  704 So. 2d 206· Fla. 5th DCA· 1998-01-09 ·cited 17×
  The City of Oviedo appealed a temporary injunction preventing it from withholding approval of sewer improvements by Alafaya Utilities until Alafaya signed a franchise agreement. The court affirmed the injunction, holding that Oviedo's conditioning of utility approvals on a unilat
• DOE v. Vill. OF Crestwood
  917 F.2d 1476· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-11 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court's finding that the Village sponsored the mass, thus violating the Establishment Clause, was not clearly erroneous, and the injunction against the mass was appealable.
• Metro. Life Ins. Co. & Jefferson-Pilot Life Ins. Co. v. RJR Nabisco
  906 F.2d 884· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-25 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court erred in tolling the contractual cure periods, as this altered the unambiguous terms of the indentures and denied the lenders their bargained-for temporal limitations.
• Jack Eckerd Corp. v. 17070 Collins Ave. Shopping Ctr., Ltd.
  563 So. 2d 103· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-05-02 ·cited 17×
  This case is a dissent arguing that a commercial tenant seeking a temporary injunction to prevent a landlord's alleged breach of a lease covenant must still demonstrate irreparable harm and inadequate remedy at law, even if monetary damages are difficult to ascertain.
• Instant AIR Freight Co. v. C.F. AIR Freight, Inc.
  882 F.2d 797· 3d Cir.· 1989-08-17 ·cited 17×
  The dissenting judge believes the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding irreparable harm and that injunctive relief was warranted.
• Korea Shipping Corp. v. NEW York Shipping Ass'n
  811 F.2d 124· 2d Cir.· 1987-02-04 ·cited 17×
  The court held that an order compelling payment of pension contributions pending resolution of a dispute, issued under statutory authority, is not a preliminary injunction appealable as of right under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) unless irreparable harm is shown.
• In re Demjanjuk v. Honorable Edwin Meese
  784 F.2d 1114· D.C. Cir.· 1986-02-27 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to a writ of habeas corpus, a hearing, or a stay of extradition because the Genocide Convention had not yet taken effect and was irrelevant to the extradition charges, which were for murder, not genocide.
• Buffalo Forge Co. v. Ampco-Pittsburgh Corp.
  638 F.2d 568· 2d Cir.· 1981-02-02 ·cited 17×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding the plaintiff failed to demonstrate serious questions going to the merits or irreparable harm.
• Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co. v. White Consol. Indus., Inc.
  414 F.2d 506· 3d Cir.· 1969-07-18 ·cited 17×
  A preliminary injunction should issue because there is a reasonable probability that the merger would create a market structure conducive to unlawful reciprocal dealing.
• Wyrough & Loser, Inc. v. Pelmor Labs., Inc.
  376 F.2d 543· 3d Cir.· 1967-03-02 ·cited 17×
  A party participating in a preliminary injunction hearing waives the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction, even if they could have filed a timely motion to dismiss.