Irreparable Injury

1,544 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 167 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Fields v. Soloff
  920 F.2d 1114· 2d Cir.· 1990-12-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that state officials are immune from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for actions taken in their judicial or prosecutorial capacities, even if those actions were erroneous or exceeded authority, as long as they did not act in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.
• Black Fire Fighters Ass'n OF Dallas v. City OF Dallas
  905 F.2d 63· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-21 ·cited 4×
• Ill. Tool Works, Inc. v. Grip-Pak, Inc.
  906 F.2d 679· Fed. Cir.· 1990-06-20 ·cited 4×·via Presumption Of Irreparable Injury
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the patent holder failed to sufficiently demonstrate the necessary equitable factors.
• DFW Metro Line Servs. v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co.
  901 F.2d 1267· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-29 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of irreparable injury, as money damages would be adequate compensation.
• Fla. Bd. OF Regents v. Armesto
  563 So. 2d 1080· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-04-12 ·cited 4×
  A university student must exhaust administrative remedies before seeking injunctive relief against academic dishonesty charges, even if she fears future consequences from the Bar Examiners.
• Transcon. GAS Pipe Line Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  866 F.2d 477· D.C. Cir.· 1989-01-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Transco's petition for review of FERC's approval of a settlement's escrow provision was not ripe for judicial review because Transco failed to demonstrate irreparable injury absent immediate intervention.
• Half Moon BAY Fishermans' Mktg. Ass'n v. Carlucci
  847 F.2d 1389· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, as the defendants had minimally complied with NEPA and MPRSA requirements for the initial dredging phase.
• United States v. BNS Inc.
  848 F.2d 945· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court held that the district court had authority to issue a preliminary injunction under the All Writs Act to preserve its jurisdiction under the APPA, and modified the injunction by appointing an independent trustee.
• Sharp Corp. v. The United States
  837 F.2d 1058· Fed. Cir.· 1988-01-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the lower court erred in granting preliminary injunctions because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate irreparable injury from complying with administrative review directives.
• Elsinore Shore Assocs. v. Local 54
  820 F.2d 62· 3d Cir.· 1987-05-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a Boys Markets injunction against a strike is improper when the underlying dispute is a non-arbitrable wage negotiation failure, not a contract interpretation issue.
• James A. Merritt AND Sons v. Marsh
  791 F.2d 328· 4th Cir.· 1986-05-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction against the suspension of a contractor from bidding on government contracts, as the contractor was unlikely to succeed on his constitutional claim and the public interest favored the suspension.
• Storer Commc'ns, Inc. v. Mogel
  625 F. Supp. 1194· S.D. Fla.· 1985-11-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendants' sale, distribution, and installation of equipment designed to intercept cable television services without authorization violated federal and state laws, entitling the plaintiffs to preliminary injunctive relief.
• In re State v. Schmidt
  474 So. 2d 899· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-08-29 ·cited 4×
• Hampton Roads Shipping Ass'n v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n (AFL-CIO)
  746 F.2d 1015· 4th Cir.· 1984-10-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction restraining a union strike was appropriate, but the order compelling arbitration under a local contract was unnecessary because the dispute was already subject to arbitration and litigation under a master contract.
• Laurence Gerard & Firejet Am., Ltd. v. Almouli
  746 F.2d 936· 2d Cir.· 1984-10-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the appellees failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and an inadequate remedy at law.
• Spath v. Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Ass'n
  728 F.2d 25· 1st Cir.· 1984-02-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the student failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits for his constitutional claims and contract claims, thus reversing the preliminary injunction.
• Emilcar Bermudez v. Reid
  720 F.2d 748· 2d Cir.· 1983-11-01 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the Attorney General's motion for a stay pending appeal, requiring the state to release the petitioner, but later granted reconsideration and a stay pending appeal due to new information.
• Bartlett v. Schweiker
  719 F.2d 1059· 10th Cir.· 1983-10-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate irreparable injury, thus the district court correctly dismissed their complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Rushia v. Town OF Ashburnham
  701 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1983-03-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction against a threatened state prosecution for violating a town's Public Display Minors Law.
• Craig v. Barney
  678 F.2d 1200· 4th Cir.· 1982-05-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court correctly applied the abstention doctrine to dismiss the complaint seeking to enjoin state grand jury proceedings.
• Del. Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air v. Commonwealth OF PA.
  674 F.2d 987· 3d Cir.· 1982-04-06 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing en banc, allowing a previously granted stay to stand pending merits panel review.
• Carden v. State OF Mont.
  626 F.2d 82· 9th Cir.· 1980-06-20 ·cited 4×
  Federal courts should not intervene via pretrial habeas corpus in state criminal prosecutions absent "special circumstances" demonstrating irreparable injury or bad faith prosecution.
• Organized Fisherman of Florida v. Andrus
  488 F. Supp. 1351· S.D. Fla.· 1980-04-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits or a substantial threat of irreparable injury, thus denying their motion for a preliminary injunction.
• Coastal States GAS Corp. v. Dep't OF Energy
  609 F.2d 736· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Coastal States failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds for a stay pending appeal, as it did not show a likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm.
• City OF Melbourne v. Cotron
  372 So. 2d 944· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-05-09 ·cited 4×
  The trial court improperly enjoined the City from taking action against the Police Chief by prescribing administrative procedures; judicial intervention in administrative processes before a hearing occurs is improper, and any due process defects are remediable through subsequent
• ST. Regis Paper Co. v. Marshall
  591 F.2d 612· 10th Cir.· 1979-01-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a plaintiff must exhaust administrative remedies before seeking judicial review, even when challenging agency regulations or facing potential debarment, unless specific exceptions apply.
• First Nat'l Bank OF Miramar v. Lewis
  355 So. 2d 869· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-03-08 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the petitioner's motion to stay the Department's order authorizing a bank branch opening.
• Hillsboro News Co. v. City OF Tampa
  544 F.2d 860· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting the preliminary injunction.
• Wright v. Chief OF Transit Police
  527 F.2d 1262· 2d Cir.· 1976-01-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the named defendants, acting in their official capacity, are 'persons' within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and thus the district court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3).
• Bures v. The Houston Symphony Soc'y
  503 F.2d 842· 5th Cir.· 1974-11-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable injury.
• Spencer Cos., Inc. v. Armonk Indus., Inc.
  489 F.2d 704· 1st Cir.· 1973-12-20 ·cited 4×·via Likelihood Of Irreparable Harm
  The court held that the denial of a temporary restraining order, under the circumstances, was appealable as a denial of a preliminary injunction, but affirmed the denial of injunctive relief.
• Reed v. Giarrusso
  462 F.2d 706· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs possessed the requisite standing to maintain their suit challenging the constitutionality of municipal ordinances, despite the dismissal of their original charges.
• Sanders v. McCLELLAN
  463 F.2d 894· D.C. Cir.· 1972-04-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the issue of a subpoena's impact on First Amendment rights is justiciable, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a sufficient threat of irreparable harm to warrant injunctive or declaratory relief before exhausting administrative remedies.
• Blankenship v. W. A. (Tony) Boyle
  447 F.2d 1280· D.C. Cir.· 1971-06-25 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the Bank's application for a stay pending appeal because the Bank failed to show a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal.
• Pressie Hughes v. Dist. Attorney FOR Atlanta
  436 F.2d 568· 5th Cir.· 1970-12-08 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Cent. Carolina Bank & Tr. Co.
  431 F.2d 972· 4th Cir.· 1970-10-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a preliminary injunction to require desegregation of the golf facility.
• Harry H. Price & Sons, Inc. v. Hardin
  425 F.2d 1137· 5th Cir.· 1970-04-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant has standing to challenge the administrative regulations and that the district court's dismissal for failure to state a claim was premature.
• Reuben G. Lenske v. Sercombe
  401 F.2d 520· 9th Cir.· 1968-09-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the federal statute barring injunctions against state court proceedings applies, and there were no extraordinary circumstances to justify an exception. The Board of Governors were also not proper parties.
• A. B. C. Bus. Forms, Inc. v. The Honorable Harold B. Spaet
  201 So. 2d 890· Fla.· 1967-07-19 ·cited 4×·via Irreparable Damage
  Florida Statute § 11.111, which mandates continuances for legislators, is unconstitutional when applied to cases seeking emergency injunctive relief due to irreparable damage.
• Gustafson's Dairy, Inc. v. State
  189 So. 2d 814· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-08-23 ·cited 4×·via Irreparable Damage
  The court held that the temporary restraining order was erroneously issued against both distributor and supermarket defendants due to insufficient allegations and lack of showing of irreparable harm.
• Noble v. Erice E. McNEAL and Jimmie S. McNeal
  179 So. 2d 126· Fla. 1st DCA· 1965-10-14 ·cited 4×·via Irreparable Damage
  The court denied a petition for writ of certiorari seeking to review an interlocutory order that refused to strike affirmative defenses from a mortgagee's answer in a contract dispute. The court held that certiorari is unavailable for interlocutory orders unless they involve venu
• 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.
• Bertram C. Ellison v. City OF Fort Lauderdale
  166 So. 2d 797· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-07-24 ·cited 4×
  Plaintiff appealed the dismissal of his complaint seeking to enjoin the City of Fort Lauderdale from enforcing a penal ordinance against his operation of a nursery school with ponies on property he claimed was a valid nonconforming use. The court affirmed the dismissal, holding t
• Mrs. Ethel Mae Coxsey v. Najeeb Hallaby
  334 F.2d 286· 10th Cir.· 1964-07-17 ·cited 4×·via Irreparable Damage
  The court held that the suit was not against the United States without consent and presented genuine issues of material fact, thus it was not ripe for summary judgment.
• The Lakefront Dock & R.R. Terminal Co. v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n
  333 F.2d 549· 6th Cir.· 1962-08-17 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the motion to suspend a preliminary injunction, finding no basis for the appellant's arguments regarding irreparable injury, the Norris-LaGuardia Act, or NLRB preemption.
• Approved Pers., Inc. v. Herman
  19 Fla. Supp. 19· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1961-11-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the non-compete provision in the employment contract was valid and reasonable, and granted a permanent injunction against the former employee.
• Title & Tr. Co. OF FLA. v. Title Guar. & Abstract Co. OF Sanford
  103 So. 2d 211· Fla. 2d DCA· 1958-06-04 ·cited 4×
  Title and Trust Company appealed dismissal of its declaratory judgment action seeking interpretation of an agency contract for title insurance and appointment of a receiver to protect records that the agent sold to a competitor. The court reversed, holding that the plaintiff was
• Pierce v. Aeronautical Commc'ns Equip., Inc.
  223 F.2d 410· 5th Cir.· 1955-06-17 ·cited 4×
  The denial of a preliminary injunction is affirmed because serious issues of validity and infringement require a trial on the merits, and no irreparable injury or abuse of discretion was shown.
• Pub. Utils. Comm'n of Dist. of Columbia v. Cap. Transit Co.
  214 F.2d 242· D.C. Cir.· 1954-05-07 ·cited 4×
  The court granted an injunction pending appeal, enjoining the company from paying a dividend and redeeming bonds, pending further investigation and report.
• Osmond v. Riverdale Manor, Inc.
  199 F.2d 75· 4th Cir.· 1952-09-29 ·cited 4×
  A party cannot seek judicial intervention to maintain the status quo while an administrative appeal is pending; administrative remedies must be fully exhausted before court intervention is permissible.