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

• Fla. Power Corp. v. Ocklawaha Reclamation Farms
  93 Fla. 740· Fla.· 1927-04-05 ·cited 2×
  Florida Power Corporation appealed from a trial court order granting a temporary restraining injunction and denying its motion to dissolve that injunction in a suit by Ocklawaha Reclamation Farms seeking to rescind certain contracts and prevent destruction of property. The Florid
• Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Feagin
  90 Fla. 62· Fla.· 1925-06-24 ·cited 2×·via Irreparable Damage
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed interlocutory orders granting a temporary restraining order and denying dissolution of that order in a property dispute between a railroad company and a landowner. The court held that the complainant failed to allege the necessary prerequisites
• Marquez-Diaz v. Ripa
  2022 WL 198811· S.D. Fla.· 2025-07-22 ·cited 1×
  The court denied the petitioner's emergency request for a temporary restraining order because he failed to meet any of the four required elements.
• Lohstreter v. English
  2020 WL 3847839· N.D. Fla.· 2024-09-17 ·cited 1×
  The court recommended denying the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction because it was not based on the claims in his complaint and sought relief beyond the scope of the complaint, and denied the motion to appoint counsel as no exceptional circumstances were shown.
• Bath & Kitchen Boutique, LLC v. Little
  390 So. 3d 44· Fla. 3d DCA· 2023-09-06 ·cited 1×
  Financial discovery is impermissible cat-out-of-the-bag discovery subject to certiorari relief where it seeks confidential financial information not relevant to claims at issue, not involving punitive damages, and not part of postjudgment proceedings. A trial court cannot use the
• City of Sweetwater v. Mejia
  316 So. 3d 769· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-04-21 ·cited 1×
  Denial of a discovery extension does not constitute a departure from the essential requirements of law when the movant actively opposed the same relief earlier and provides insufficient explanation to the trial court regarding the necessity of the discovery.
• Joaquin Dominguez & Carmen Dominguez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp.
  269 So. 3d 623· Fla. 2d DCA· 2019-04-24 ·cited 1×
  A party does not waive attorney-client privilege merely by retaining counsel to report an insurance loss, and a trial court must conduct in camera inspection of documents that appear on their face to potentially invoke attorney-client or work-product privileges before ordering th
• ASA Coll., Inc. v. Dezer Intracoastal Mall, LLC
  250 So. 3d 731· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-06-20 ·cited 1×
  ASA College appeals a trial court order denying its motion for temporary injunction against Dezer regarding parking rights, while affirming the court's grant of Dezer's motion to enjoin ASA's college operation. The Third District reversed the denial of ASA's parking injunction ba
• Orange Cnty. v. Fla. Ass'n FOR Constitutional Officers, Inc.
  229 So. 3d 867· Fla. 5th DCA· 2017-10-13 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the trial court's order granting a temporary injunction without notice was improper because it failed to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610.
• Akhnoukh A. Akhnoukh and Simon Bishoy Akhnoukh v. Benvenuto
  219 So. 3d 96· Fla. 2d DCA· 2017-04-19 ·cited 1×
  In a negligence action arising from a motor vehicle accident, the court granted certiorari relief and quashed a trial court's protective order that prohibited the deposition of the plaintiff's minor son. The court held that the minor is a material witness whose deposition cannot
• Blue Earth Solutions v. Fla. Consol. Props., LLC
  113 So. 3d 991· Fla. 5th DCA· 2013-04-12 ·cited 1×·via Likelihood Of Irreparable Harm
  Blue Earth Solutions appeals a temporary injunction requiring them to restore possession of business premises to Florida Consolidated Properties following an asset purchase agreement dispute. The court reverses, holding that the injunction was legally untenable because the partie
• Berta C. Gomez v. Rendon
  126 So. 3d 315· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-04-03 ·cited 1×
  Petitioner Gomez seeks certiorari to review a trial court's denial of her motion for a post-surgical independent medical examination (IME) of the minor respondent Oquendo following his second ankle surgery. The court grants the petition, holding that the trial court erred in deny
• Intelsat Corp. v. Multivision TV LLC
  736 F. Supp. 2d 1334· S.D. Fla.· 2010-08-24 ·cited 1×
  The court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction against all defendants, finding that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a likelihood of irreparable injury, particularly regarding the actual and imminent nature of the harm.
• Pandora Jewelers 1995, Inc. v. Pandora Jewelry, LLC
  703 F. Supp. 2d 1307· S.D. Fla.· 2010-03-18 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction should be denied because the defendant's affirmative defense of laches is likely to be meritorious, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate irreparable injury, and the balance of hardships tips in favor of the de
• United States v. Cruz
  618 F. Supp. 2d 1372· S.D. Fla.· 2008-12-30 ·cited 1×
  The court held that while defendants engaged in conduct impeding IRS administration, their efforts to correct past behavior and implement new procedures warranted keeping them in business with an injunction against offending conduct.
• Palm Beach Cnty. Env't Coal. v. Florida
  587 F. Supp. 2d 1254· S.D. Fla.· 2008-11-18 ·cited 1×·via Immediate And Irreparable Injury
  The court denied plaintiffs' motion for temporary injunctive relief because they failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits and lacked proper service and jurisdiction over defendants. The court also denied the intervenor-defendant's motion in limine as moot.
• Fla. State Conf. of the Nat'l Ass'n v. Browning
  569 F. Supp. 2d 1237· N.D. Fla.· 2008-06-24 ·cited 1×
  The court denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that the amended Florida statute requiring verification of identification numbers for voter registration did not facially violate constitutional rights.
• Delvecchio v. Smith
  558 F. Supp. 2d 1243· S.D. Fla.· 2008-03-31 ·cited 1×
  The court granted the motion to dismiss in part, allowing the quiet title claim to proceed if service is perfected, but dismissing claims under 26 U.S.C. § 7433 and the Declaratory Judgment Act.
• Dispoto v. Marion Cnty.
  969 So. 2d 423· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-11-02 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a temporary injunction requiring the removal of a radio tower and cessation of radio station operation due to violations of county land development codes.
• 800 Adept, Inc. v. Murex Sec., Ltd.
  505 F. Supp. 2d 1327· M.D. Fla.· 2007-04-12 ·cited 1×
  The court granted a permanent injunction against further patent infringement but denied prejudgment interest on state law claims due to an unclear damages calculation and on patent claims due to undue delay. Enhanced damages were awarded due to willful infringement.
• Johnston v. Tampa Sports Auth.
  442 F. Supp. 2d 1257· M.D. Fla.· 2006-07-28 ·cited 1×
  Mass suspicionless pat-downs at NFL games constitute unreasonable searches under the Florida Constitution and Fourth Amendment because the Tampa Sports Authority failed to establish a substantial and real risk of a terrorist attack justifying a 'special needs' exception.
• Matthews v. City OF Maitland
  923 So. 2d 591· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-03-24 ·cited 1×
  Petitioners challenged trial court orders compelling disclosure of names of contributors to a litigation fund and website opposing a city development project. The court granted certiorari, holding that disclosure was irrelevant to the issues in the case and would chill First Amen
• Grant v. United States
  289 F. Supp. 2d 1361· S.D. Fla.· 2003-07-03 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the IRS's termination of the installment agreement and levying of social security benefits may constitute unauthorized collection actions, but claims related to the filing of a prior tax case, specific performance, and return of levied property are dismissed.
• Kforce, Inc. v. Kerin Mickenberg
  846 So. 2d 1190· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-05-21 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the former employee's emails to customers constituted solicitation, creating a presumption of irreparable injury, entitling the employer to a temporary injunction.
• Pharm. Research & Mfrs. of Am. v. Medows
  184 F. Supp. 2d 1186· N.D. Fla.· 2001-12-28 ·cited 1×
  The court held that Florida's amended statutes authorizing a preferred drug list and prior authorization program do not conflict with federal Medicaid law and thus are not preempted.
• Howard v. City of Jacksonville
  109 F. Supp. 2d 1360· M.D. Fla.· 2000-06-27 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the City of Jacksonville's 120-day moratorium on adult entertainment licenses is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech, violating the First Amendment.
• Sch. Bd. of Pinellas Cnty. v. J.M. Ex Rel. L.M.
  957 F. Supp. 1252· M.D. Fla.· 1997-04-04 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the School Board is entitled to an injunction temporarily enjoining the 'stay-put' provision of the IDEA because the student's current placement poses a substantial likelihood of injury to others, and the School Board has made reasonable efforts to accommodate
• S. Dade Land Corp. v. Sullivan
  853 F. Supp. 404· S.D. Fla.· 1993-11-23 ·cited 1×·via Immediate And Irreparable Injury
  The court held that plaintiffs failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits for any of their claims, thus denying their emergency motion for a temporary restraining order.
• Tooke v. Sunshine Tr. Mortg. Tr. NO. 86-225
  149 B.R. 687· M.D. Fla.· 1992-06-22 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the appellants were likely to prevail on the merits of their appeal because the mandatory application of 11 U.S.C. § 109(g)(2) was not warranted by the facts, and therefore granted their motion for a stay pending appeal.
• Haitian Refugee Ctr., Inc. v. Baker
  789 F. Supp. 1579· S.D. Fla.· 1991-12-20 ·cited 1×
  The court granted plaintiffs' request for supplemental findings regarding the APA and granted a limited injunction for First Amendment access, while denying other injunctive relief.
• Haitian Refugee Ctr., Inc. v. Baker
  789 F. Supp. 1552· S.D. Fla.· 1991-12-03 ·cited 1×
  The District Court for the Southern District of Florida granted preliminary injunctive relief to the Haitian Refugee Center (HRC) and individual Haitian plaintiffs challenging the U.S. government's forced repatriation of Haitians interdicted at sea without adequate procedural saf
• Mount Sinai Med. Ctr. of Greater Miami, Inc. v. City of Miami Beach
  706 F. Supp. 1525· S.D. Fla.· 1989-01-30 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff demonstrated a substantial likelihood of prevailing on its due process claim and equitable estoppel claim, justifying a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the zoning ordinance as interpreted.
• S. Fla. Growers Ass'n v. United States Dep't of Agric.
  554 F. Supp. 633· S.D. Fla.· 1982-11-26 ·cited 1×
  The court held that plaintiffs were entitled to due process, including notice and a hearing, before the USDA could implement emergency interim regulations allowing the importation of Persian limes from Mexico, as their property interests were at stake.
• Anderson Seafoods, Inc. v. Graham
  529 F. Supp. 512· N.D. Fla.· 1982-01-08 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of prevailing on its federal preemption claim, thus denying the motion for a preliminary injunction.
• Hazouri v. Maillet
  276 So. 2d 70· Fla. 1st DCA· 1973-02-08 ·cited 1×
• Langley v. NEW Deal CAB Co.
  169 So. 2d 340· Fla. 1st DCA· 1964-12-01 ·cited 1×
  Langley appeals a final injunction prohibiting him from operating taxicabs in Jacksonville except for casual, incidental, and fortuitous operations. The court affirms the injunction, finding that Langley's operation was designed and executed as a subterfuge to avoid city taxicab
• HM Florida-ORL, LLC v. Sec'y of the Fla. Dep't of Bus.
  11th Cir.· 2026-08-04
  The district court lacked authority to issue a universal injunction against enforcement of Florida's Protection of Children Act because universal injunctions exceed a federal court's equitable authority under the Judiciary Act, as established in Trump v. CASA, Inc., and no except
• iCare Child Dev. Ctr. LLC v. Alethea Cicero-Brown
  11th Cir.· 2026-06-11
  A childcare provider dismissed from a state voucher program for failing to comply with an on-site audit is not entitled to a pre-deprivation hearing under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Under the Mathews v. Eldridge balancing test, the provider's private inte
• Wolfson v. Andria Pardes
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-03-06
  Jill Pardes Wolfson was held in civil contempt for discovery violations and failure to pay court-ordered fees, with immediate incarceration ordered. The appellate court quashed the order because it lacked required findings about Jill's present ability to purge the contempt and fa
• NEC Fund VI HE Lender, LLC
  Del. Ch.· 2026-02-25
  NEC Fund VI, a lender to Hecate Holdings, seeks a preliminary injunction to recover $75 million in settlement proceeds from Hecate's settlement with Repsol over a put option dispute. Although the court found NEC likely to succeed on breach of contract claims, it denied the prelim
• Bridlington Bud Ltd. v. The P'ships
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-02-11
  The court granted plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction, finding a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of trademark infringement and a high probability of irreparable harm.
• Bridlington Bud Ltd v. The P'ships
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-02-10
  The court granted plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from using the ACDANC trademark on infringing products and ordering asset freezes.
• Bridlington Bud Ltd v. The P'ships
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-01-27
  The court granted the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, restraining defendants from using the plaintiff's trademark and freezing their assets.
• Albion Brand Foundry Ltd v. The P'ships
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-01-15
  The court granted the plaintiff's ex parte application for a temporary restraining order, enjoining defendants from using the plaintiff's trademark and restraining their assets.
• Camacho v. The Sch. Bd. of Pinellas Cnty.
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-09
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order because the alleged harm was not actual or imminent, and the motion was procedurally deficient.
• Washington v. PNC Bank
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-08
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction because he failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm.
• Yanyun Indus. Ltd. v. United States Customs & Border Prot.
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-01-07
  The court recommended granting the plaintiff's motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order, enjoining Customs and Border Protection from releasing disputed cargo to anyone but the plaintiff.
• Miller v. Global Elec. Testing Servs.
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-06
  The court held that the movant failed to establish a substantial likelihood of irreparable injury, a necessary prerequisite for a preliminary injunction.
• Isabella Maryanovsky v. Garret Ripa
  M.D. Fla.· 2026-01-05
  The court granted in part and denied in part the petitioner's emergency motion for a temporary restraining order, enjoining respondents from removing the petitioner from the district but denying the request to enjoin her ongoing detention.
• Clements v. Glass
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-31
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and permanent injunction, finding he failed to establish the necessary elements for such relief.