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

• Hapney v. Cent. Garage, Inc.
  579 So. 2d 127· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-02-01 ·cited 66×
  Hapney, a former employee of Gulfcoast Auto, signed a non-compete covenant restricting his work within a three-year period and geographic area. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's temporary injunction, holding that an employee covenant not to co
• T.J. Cunningham v. Adams
  808 F.2d 815· 11th Cir.· 1987-01-26 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the preliminary injunction because the appellant failed to establish a likelihood of prevailing on the merits or irreparable harm.
• Smith Int'l, Inc. v. Hughes Tool Co.
  718 F.2d 1573· Fed. Cir.· 1983-10-06 ·cited 66×·via Presumption Of Irreparable Injury
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a preliminary injunction based on a mistaken requirement to prove the extent of infringement before issuing the injunction, and that a strong showing of patent validity and infringement creates a presumption of irreparable h
• Dopp v. Franklin Nat'l Bank
  461 F.2d 873· 2d Cir.· 1972-05-30 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of his securities law claim or irreparable injury, thus the preliminary injunction was improperly granted.
• Wright v. Rushen
  642 F.2d 1129· 9th Cir.· 1981-03-13 ·cited 64×
  A preliminary injunction mandating extensive prison reforms must be set aside if the district court fails to apply the proper legal standards for assessing the plaintiffs' probability of success on the merits.
• Erdmann v. Stevens
  458 F.2d 1205· 2d Cir.· 1972-04-12 ·cited 64×
  Federal courts should not intervene in state bar disciplinary proceedings unless there are exceptional circumstances like bad faith or irreparable harm not remediable in state court.
• Ruiz v. Estelle
  650 F.2d 555· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-26 ·cited 62×
  The court held that a movant seeking a stay pending appeal need not always show a probability of success on the merits, but rather a substantial case when a serious legal question is involved and the balance of equities favors the stay.
• Thermo-Stitch, Inc. v. Chemi-Cord Processing Corp. & Standwear Pleating Co., Inc.
  294 F.2d 486· 5th Cir.· 1961-09-15 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying a jury trial on patent infringement issues when a legal counterclaim was present, despite the plaintiff's request for equitable relief.
• The Hawaiian INN OF Daytona Beach Inc. v. Snead Constr. Corp.
  393 So. 2d 1201· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-02-18 ·cited 61×
  The Hawaiian Inn seeks a writ of common law certiorari to overturn a trial court order denying leave to file a second amended complaint. The appellate court denies the petition, holding that common law certiorari is not an appropriate remedy for ordinary reversible errors in tria
• Apple Barrel Prods., Inc. v. R.D. Beard
  730 F.2d 384· 5th Cir.· 1984-04-23 ·cited 60×
  The court held that while the district court may have erred in its analysis of copyright infringement and misappropriation claims, the denial of the preliminary injunction is affirmed because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the threatened injury to them outweighed the p
• Nat'l Ass'n OF Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO v. Sombrotto
  449 F.2d 915· 2d Cir.· 1971-09-28 ·cited 60×
  The court held that reversing a denial of preliminary injunctive relief in a labor dispute, especially after a supervening event like a national agreement, is an extraordinary and potentially inappropriate action for an appellate court.
• Cool Fuel v. Connett
  685 F.2d 309· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-24 ·cited 59×
  The court held that a taxpayer seeking to enjoin IRS collection must still satisfy traditional equitable prerequisites, including irreparable injury and lack of an adequate legal remedy, even if statutory notice procedures were not followed.
• Ferrero v. Associated Materials Inc.
  923 F.2d 1441· 11th Cir.· 1991-02-01 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the new Georgia statute permitting reformation of covenants not to compete applies retroactively and that the preliminary injunction was properly granted under federal procedural standards.
• Helene Curtis Indus., Inc. v. Church & Dwight Co., Inc.
  560 F.2d 1325· 7th Cir.· 1977-08-17 ·cited 58×
  The court affirmed the preliminary injunction, finding a likelihood of success on the merits for trademark infringement and unfair competition due to consumer confusion, and that the defendant's antitrust claims did not preclude the injunction.
• Schwartz v. Napoleon Covington
  341 F.2d 537· 9th Cir.· 1965-02-10 ·cited 58×
  The court affirmed the district court's stay of discharge, finding that the traditional factors for granting a stay pending review were met.
• Brown v. Antonio Solary et ux.
  37 Fla. 102· Fla.· 1896-01-01 ·cited 57×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed an equity court's jurisdiction to grant an injunction and account against defendants for mining phosphate from complainants' land under a void tax deed, holding that the destruction of mineral deposits constitutes irreparable injury sufficient t
• Eligio Castro and Rafael Diaz Diaz v. United States
  775 F.2d 399· 1st Cir.· 1985-03-14 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the appellants' claims, enjoining them from further litigation, and assessing costs, as they failed to exhaust administrative remedies, state valid claims, or demonstrate grounds for injunctive relief.
• The Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Marshall
  610 F.2d 1128· 3d Cir.· 1979-11-16 ·cited 56×
  A company must exhaust its administrative remedies before seeking judicial relief for constitutional challenges to OSHA inspection warrants, even after the warrant has been executed.
• Minn. Bearing Co. v. White Motor Corp.
  470 F.2d 1323· 8th Cir.· 1973-01-09 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction, but erred in dismissing the parent corporation as a defendant, treating it as a summary judgment without sufficient clarity.
• Omega Importing Corp. v. Petri-Kine Camera Co., Inc.
  451 F.2d 1190· 2d Cir.· 1971-11-08 ·cited 56×
  The court held that a temporary injunction should issue to preserve the status quo pending a final determination of trademark rights, balancing the hardships and likelihood of confusion.
• Carter-Wallace, Inc. v. Davis-Edwards Pharmacal Corp.
  443 F.2d 867· 2d Cir.· 1971-05-04 ·cited 56×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction should not have been granted because the patent's validity was not beyond question, and the lower court applied an incorrect standard. However, the court reviewed the merits and found the patent likely valid and infringed, but still re
• United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  181 F.2d 796· D.C. Cir.· 1950-04-05 ·cited 56×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to directly review the Federal Power Commission's rule, as it was a general regulation and not an order based on a quasi-judicial proceeding. Proper remedies lie elsewhere.
• Sullivan v. Moreno
  19 Fla. 200· Fla.· 1882-06-01 ·cited 56×
  Sullivan sought an injunction to prevent Moreno from constructing a wharf and depositing materials in Pensacola Bay in front of Sullivan's property. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the injunction, holding that Sullivan failed to establish riparian proprietorship or sufficient
• Factors ETC., Inc. v. PRO Arts, Inc.
  579 F.2d 215· 2d Cir.· 1978-06-27 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the right of publicity for Elvis Presley survived his death and was validly transferred to Factors, and that Pro Arts' memorial poster was not privileged as a newsworthy event.
• West v. Bergland
  611 F.2d 710· 8th Cir.· 1979-12-19 ·cited 54×
• Int'l Bus. Machs. Corp. v. United States
  480 F.2d 293· 2d Cir.· 1973-05-08 ·cited 54×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the discovery order, either by appeal or mandamus, due to the Expediting Act and the interlocutory nature of the order.
• Manual de J. Gomez v. Wilson
  477 F.2d 411· D.C. Cir.· 1973-03-23 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the district court correctly found police spot checks unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment, but the case should be remanded for further proceedings to determine the scope of relief, particularly regarding class action.
• Perry v. Perry
  190 F.2d 601· D.C. Cir.· 1951-04-12 ·cited 54×
• Proudfoot Consulting Co. v. Gordon
  576 F.3d 1223· 11th Cir.· 2009-07-30 ·cited 53×
  Proudfoot Consulting Company sued former employee Derrick Gordon for breaching restrictive covenants in his employment agreement after he joined Highland, a direct competitor, in June 2006. The district court found all restrictive covenants enforceable under Florida law, granted
• Moises Garcia-Mir v. Meese
  781 F.2d 1450· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 53×
  The court agreed with the result reached by the majority, but disagreed with the majority's assessment of the merits of the government's case.
• Constructors Ass'n of W. Pa. v. Kreps
  573 F.2d 811· 3d Cir.· 1978-03-07 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction against the MBE set-aside provision of the Local Public Works Act, as the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a strong likelihood of success on the merits or sufficient irreparable
• Dolta Jo Morgan v. Fletcher
  518 F.2d 236· 5th Cir.· 1975-08-27 ·cited 53×
  A post-termination hearing is sufficient to satisfy due process requirements, and mere loss of income or benefits does not constitute irreparable injury justifying injunctive relief.
• Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc. v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.
  212 So. 2d 365· Fla. 4th DCA· 1968-06-27 ·cited 52×
  Greyhound obtained a temporary injunction preventing competitor Tamiami Trail Tours from operating bus service on the Sunshine State Turnpike. The appellate court reversed, holding that the injunction improperly disturbed the status quo and that Greyhound failed to demonstrate ir
• United States v. Ingersoll-Rand Co.
  320 F.2d 509· 3d Cir.· 1963-06-05 ·cited 52×
  The court held that interlocutory orders granting injunctions are appealable to the courts of appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), even in antitrust cases, unless a direct appeal to the Supreme Court is specifically provided.
• Miami Beach Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Callander
  256 F.2d 410· 5th Cir.· 1958-06-17 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the district court's order granting broad injunctive relief and mandating a special shareholder meeting was improper, exceeding its equity powers and the scope of a preliminary injunction.
• Martin v. Sargent
  780 F.2d 1334· 8th Cir.· 1985-12-20 ·cited 50×
  The court held that a prisoner's claims for injunctive and declaratory relief regarding prison conditions are moot if the prisoner is no longer subject to those conditions, but claims for monetary damages may proceed. Claims based on respondeat superior or general allegations wit
• Buffalo Courier-Express, Inc. v. Buffalo Evening News, Inc.
  601 F.2d 48· 2d Cir.· 1979-04-16 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to show a clear probability of success on the merits for an attempt to monopolize claim, as the defendant's actions did not demonstrate specific intent or predatory cond
• Squillacote v. Local 248
  534 F.2d 735· 7th Cir.· 1976-04-13 ·cited 50×
  Federal district courts have the power to grant temporary restraining orders under 29 U.S.C. § 160(j), and the notice provided was sufficient to establish jurisdiction. The court also found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting the temporary restraining
• Moore v. DeYOUNG
  515 F.2d 437· 3d Cir.· 1975-04-08 ·cited 50×
  The federal court erred in granting a writ of habeas corpus and enjoining ongoing state criminal proceedings. The petitioner failed to exhaust his state court remedies on the merits of his speedy trial claim and did not demonstrate "extraordinary circumstances" that would justify
• Ruiz v. Leonard Steiner, M.D.
  599 So. 2d 196· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-05-05 ·cited 49×
  Rosa Ruiz sought discovery of testimony regarding a meeting between an autopsy pathologist and treating physicians to discuss autopsy findings on her deceased husband. The trial court denied her motion to compel, asserting medical review committee privilege; the appellate court g
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Conde
  595 So. 2d 1005· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-03-06 ·cited 49×
  Allstate Insurance sought a declaratory judgment that it had no obligation to defend or indemnify its insured, Osvaldo Conde, for shooting injuries on the ground that the shooting was intentional and thus excluded from coverage. The court reversed the trial court's summary judgme
• Am. Express Travel Related Servs., Inc. v. Cruz
  761 So. 2d 1206· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-06-28 ·cited 48×
  American Express sought a writ of certiorari to quash a trial court order compelling production of its Internal Credit Authorizations Manual and personnel/investigative files in a discovery dispute with a former cardholder who counterclaimed for unauthorized charges. The court gr
• Dollar Rent A CAR OF Wash., Inc. v. The Travelers Indem. Co.
  774 F.2d 1371· 9th Cir.· 1985-10-24 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting the preliminary injunction and in holding Travelers in civil contempt because Dollar and Viking failed to demonstrate irreparable injury or a strong likelihood of success on the merits, and the contempt order was based on i
• Wallace v. Lynn
  507 F.2d 1186· D.C. Cir.· 1974-12-04 ·cited 48×
  The court held that federal employees must exhaust administrative remedies before seeking judicial relief for employment disputes, even when constitutional claims are raised.
• Clay L. Shaw v. Garrison
  467 F.2d 113· 5th Cir.· 1972-07-31 ·cited 48×
  A finding of bad faith or harassment in a state criminal prosecution is equivalent to showing irreparable injury, thus satisfying the 'special circumstances' requirement for federal courts to enjoin such proceedings under Younger v. Harris.
• Marcera v. Chinlund
  595 F.2d 1231· 2d Cir.· 1979-02-27 ·cited 47×
  The dissenting judge argues that the court should not mandate a statewide 'contact' visitation program for jails without clearly defining the constitutional right involved and considering the significant costs and administrative burdens.
• Miami Bridge Co. v. THE Miami Beach Ry. Co.
  152 Fla. 458· Fla.· 1943-03-05 ·cited 47×
  The Miami Bridge Company appeals an order requiring it to allow the Miami Beach Railway Company to operate buses over its toll causeway and bridges upon payment of reasonable compensation. The court addresses whether a utility can be compelled to set rates and permit access to it
• B. L. E. Realty Corp. v. Mary Williams Co., Inc.
  101 Fla. 254· Fla.· 1931-04-20 ·cited 47×
  The appellate court reversed a lower court's decision to grant a temporary injunction and deny a motion to dissolve it. The court found the underlying creditor's bill lacked equity because the plaintiff had not obtained a judgment at law and the suit did not meet statutory requir
• Reporters Comm. FOR Freedom OF the Press v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co.
  593 F.2d 1030· D.C. Cir.· 1978-08-11 ·cited 46×
  The court held that while some appellants made a sufficient showing to warrant further proceedings regarding potential equitable relief for alleged bad-faith investigations, the broad injunctive relief sought was not justified by the record.
• Johnson v. United States Dep't OF Agric.
  734 F.2d 774· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-18 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs showed a substantial likelihood of success on the merits regarding due process claims related to non-judicial foreclosure.