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

• Mullis v. Arco Petroleum Corp. & Atl. Richfield Corp.
  502 F.2d 290· 7th Cir.· 1974-08-05 ·cited 45×
  A local jobber cannot use the Robinson-Patman Act or Section 2 of the Sherman Act to prevent a lawful termination of their distributorship, even during a product shortage, if the termination itself is not unlawful and the defendant lacks monopoly power in the relevant market.
• Oakland Tribune, Inc. v. The Chronicle Publ'g Co., Inc.
  762 F.2d 1374· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-14 ·cited 44×
  The denial of a preliminary injunction is affirmed because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a significant threat of irreparable injury.
• Aleknagik Natives Ltd. v. Andrus
  648 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1980-04-07 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and should have granted preliminary injunctive relief.
• Sullivan v. State
  372 So. 2d 938· Fla.· 1979-06-22 ·cited 44×
  Robert Sullivan, convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in 1973, sought collateral relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial of his motion, finding that eleven of twelve issues raised were barred
• Bannercraft Clothing Co., Inc. v. The Renegotiation Bd.
  466 F.2d 345· D.C. Cir.· 1972-07-06 ·cited 44×
  The Freedom of Information Act confers jurisdiction on district courts to enjoin administrative proceedings pending judicial determination of document disclosure, and the exhaustion doctrine does not preclude such injunctions when necessary to prevent irreparable injury.
• Lieberman v. Marshall
  236 So. 2d 120· Fla.· 1970-05-28 ·cited 44×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a temporary injunction that prohibited SDS members from occupying university buildings without permission, holding that the university had a valid interest in maintaining campus order and that the students' constitutional rights to free speech a
• Burton N. Pugach v. Honorable Isidore Dollinger
  277 F.2d 739· 2d Cir.· 1960-04-14 ·cited 44×
  Federal courts should not enjoin state officers from divulging wiretap evidence in state criminal trials, even if such divulgence violates federal law.
• Am. Fed'n of Musicians v. Stein
  213 F.2d 679· 6th Cir.· 1954-06-16 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting a preliminary injunction, as the Norris-LaGuardia Act was inapplicable and the jurisdictional question regarding diversity of citizenship was a substantial issue for the district court to determine.
• Cooper v. Hutchinson
  184 F.2d 119· 3d Cir.· 1950-07-21 ·cited 44×
  The dissenting judge believes the District Court's denial of an injunction should be affirmed, as federal courts should not intervene when state remedies are available and no irreparable harm is shown.
• Bradley v. Health Coal., Inc.
  687 So. 2d 329· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-02-05 ·cited 43×
  Bradley, a former salesman, appeals a temporary injunction enforcing a noncompetition agreement after he went to work for a competitor. The court reverses the injunction and remands, holding that the trial court erred in refusing to consider Bradley's defenses of employer breach
• Chalk v. United States Dist. Court Cent. Dist. OF Cal.
  840 F.2d 701· 9th Cir.· 1988-02-26 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a preliminary injunction, finding that the teacher with AIDS demonstrated probable success on the merits and irreparable injury.
• Capraro v. Lanier Bus. Prods., Inc.
  466 So. 2d 212· Fla.· 1985-03-21 ·cited 43×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that irreparable injury is presumed upon proof of breach of a valid covenant not to compete, eliminating the plaintiff's burden to prove irreparable harm as a prerequisite to obtaining a temporary injunction.
• City OF Jacksonville v. Wilson
  157 Fla. 838· Fla.· 1946-08-02 ·cited 43×
  Jacksonville city officials challenged a temporary restraining order prohibiting police interference with the Wilson's licensed restaurant business. The Florida Supreme Court held that the Wilsons' complaint failed to state grounds for equitable relief because it alleged only pas
• Savage v. Parker
  53 Fla. 1002· Fla.· 1907-01-01 ·cited 43×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed an interlocutory injunction granted ex parte against an executor accused of mismanaging estate cattle. The court held that the plaintiff's showing was insufficient under applicable law and that the injunction was granted without proper statutory
• Rousso v. Hannon
  146 So. 3d 66· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-08-06 ·cited 42×
  The court granted certiorari relief to non-parties Rousso and Alhadeff, quashing a trial court order that required them to disclose confidential financial information and potentially privileged attorney-client communications in an underlying contract dispute. The court held that
• Ruiz v. Estelle
  666 F.2d 854· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-14 ·cited 42×
  The court granted in part and denied in part the State's motion to stay provisions of an injunctive decree pending appeal, applying established criteria for stays.
• John B. Hull, Inc. v. Waterbury Petroleum Prods., Inc.
  588 F.2d 24· 2d Cir.· 1978-11-30 ·cited 42×
  The court held that while a preliminary injunction was warranted, the scope of the injunction issued by the district court was too broad and required modification to address only the specific conduct complained of and allow for statutory defenses.
• Wulp v. Corcoran
  454 F.2d 826· 1st Cir.· 1972-01-11 ·cited 42×
  A city ordinance requiring permits and badges for selling newspapers and other printed materials on the streets is unconstitutional on its face, violating First Amendment rights.
• Interphoto Corp. v. Minolta Corp.
  417 F.2d 621· 2d Cir.· 1969-10-16 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the manufacturer's challenges to the district court's findings of fact and conclusions regarding irreparable injury were without merit, and affirmed the district court's orders.
• Indus. Elecs. Corp. v. Cline
  330 F.2d 480· 3d Cir.· 1964-04-21 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to sustain its burden of proof regarding the amount in controversy and irreparable injury.
• Miss. Power & Light Co. & Miss. Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. United GAS Pipe Line Co.
  760 F.2d 618· 5th Cir.· 1985-05-17 ·cited 41×
  The court held that a temporary injunction was not supported by a sufficient showing of irreparable injury, which is a necessary prerequisite for such relief.
• Gould v. Control Laser Corp.
  650 F.2d 617· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 41×
  The court held that summary judgment orders are not appealable as interlocutory orders denying injunctions unless the appellant demonstrates a substantial threat of irreparable injury and that the order can only be effectually challenged by immediate appeal.
• DOE v. Charleston Area Med. Ctr., Inc.
  529 F.2d 638· 4th Cir.· 1975-11-06 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the hospital's policy of prohibiting abortions, based on an unconstitutional state statute, constituted state action and that denying such abortions caused irreparable injury, warranting injunctive relief.
• Buchanan v. United States Postal Serv.
  508 F.2d 259· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-19 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the Postal Service's consolidation of district offices was not a "change in the nature of postal services" requiring submission to the Postal Rate Commission, but affirmed the preliminary injunction for the Retail Analysis Program (RAP) due to factual disputes
• Chicago Area Military Project v. City OF Chicago
  508 F.2d 921· 7th Cir.· 1975-01-08 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the First Amendment protects the distribution of literature in the public areas of O'Hare Airport terminal buildings, and the city's ban was unconstitutional.
• Becker v. Thompson
  459 F.2d 919· 5th Cir.· 1972-05-03 ·cited 41×
  The concurring opinion argues that the majority's broad interpretation of Younger v. Harris is unnecessary and incorrect given the facts, and that federal intervention is not justified without a pending state prosecution or allegations of bad faith harassment.
• Foundry Servs., Inc. v. Beneflux Corp.
  206 F.2d 214· 2d Cir.· 1953-07-14 ·cited 41×
  The court held that an injunction pendente lite was improvidently granted because the plaintiff failed to show irreparable injury, as any loss from competition could be adequately redressed by money damages.
• Davis v. Wilson
  139 Fla. 698· Fla.· 1939-08-01 ·cited 40×
  Davis sought an injunction under Florida's "No Fence Law" to prevent Wilson's cattle from trespassing on his property and damaging his citrus trees. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's grant of the injunction, holding that the bill failed to allege sufficient fac
• Seaboard All Fla. Ry. Co. v. Underhill
  105 Fla. 409· Fla.· 1932-05-03 ·cited 40×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a trial court's overruling of demurrers to a bill in equity seeking to enjoin a railroad company from obstructing surface water drainage, which caused periodic flooding of the complainants' agricultural land. The court held that a properly pleaded
• Fairchild v. Lucinda M. House
  18 Fla. 770· Fla.· 1882-01-01 ·cited 40×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a preliminary injunction restraining a sheriff's levy on property claimed by a married woman as her separate property, holding that a wife's constitutional exemption from liability for her husband's debts is absolute and not conditioned by prior
• United States v. The State OF Ala.
  791 F.2d 1450· 11th Cir.· 1986-06-06 ·cited 39×
  The court held that Alabama State University lacked standing to sue under Section 1983 and Title VI, and that while the Eleventh Amendment bars injunctions against the State Board itself, it permits injunctive relief against Board members in their official capacities.
• Roper Corp. v. Litton Sys., Inc.
  757 F.2d 1266· Fed. Cir.· 1985-03-15 ·cited 39×
  The court held that a patentee seeking a preliminary injunction must demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable injury, and that mere apprehension of future infringement or Litton's financial solvency does not automatically establish irreparable harm.
• Env't Servs., Inc. v. Carter
  9 So. 3d 1258· Fla. 5th DCA· 2009-04-24 ·cited 38×·via Presumption Of Irreparable Injury
  Environmental Services, Inc. appeals a trial court's partial denial of its application for temporary injunctive relief against three former employees and their new employer for violating non-compete, non-solicitation, and confidentiality agreements. The Fifth District affirms in
• The Flying Tiger Line v. Teamsters Pension Tr. Fund OF Philadelphia & vicinity
  830 F.2d 1241· 3d Cir.· 1987-09-30 ·cited 38×
  A federal district court or arbitrator should resolve whether a corporate entity is an employer subject to MPPAA withdrawal liability, and the MPPAA's dispute resolution procedures, including arbitration, must be followed when the dispute concerns the 'evade or avoid' provision.
• United Steelworkers OF Am., AFL-CIO v. Fort Pitt Steel Casting
  598 F.2d 1273· 3d Cir.· 1979-04-30 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the Boys Markets exception to the Norris-LaGuardia Act allowed injunctions to preserve the arbitral process, even against employers, and that continuing premium payments during plant wind-down was necessary to maintain the status quo for arbitration.
• Lynch v. Snepp
  472 F.2d 769· 4th Cir.· 1973-01-26 ·cited 38×
  A federal court should not grant a preliminary injunction to restrain a state civil proceeding unless the federal plaintiff demonstrates great and immediate irreparable injury that cannot be remedied by the state court.
• United Transp. Union v. Burlington N., Inc.
  458 F.2d 354· 8th Cir.· 1972-04-13 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the district court erred in issuing a temporary injunction without considering irreparable injury, as the dispute was a minor one under the Railway Labor Act.
• Clairol Inc. v. The Gillette Co.
  389 F.2d 264· 2d Cir.· 1968-01-29 ·cited 38×
  The court held that a color designation, even if fanciful, is insufficient to warrant a preliminary injunction for trademark infringement unless it has acquired a secondary meaning indicating origin.
• Joseph Bancroft & Sons Co. v. Shelley Knitting Mills, Inc.
  268 F.2d 569· 3d Cir.· 1959-07-02 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the District Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction because there was insufficient evidence of irreparable injury to the plaintiff and the court failed to adequately balance the conveniences and potential injuries to
• Eight Hundred, Inc. v. Fla. Dep't OF Revenue
  837 So. 2d 574· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-02-12 ·cited 37×
  The court held that an administrative law judge erred by ordering the disclosure of documents and testimony claimed to be privileged without conducting an evidentiary hearing.
• State v. Lozano
  616 So. 2d 73· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-03-10 ·cited 37×
  The Florida Supreme Court's First District granted certiorari to review a trial judge's order denying a change of venue in the high-profile William Lozano case, where Lozano, a Hispanic police officer, was charged with killing two Black motorists. The court found the judge's orde
• Crouse-Hinds Co. v. Internorth, Inc.
  634 F.2d 690· 2d Cir.· 1980-11-14 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the district court improperly allocated the burden of proof regarding the business judgment rule when assessing the merits of InterNorth's counterclaim for a preliminary injunction.
• Leibman v. Sportatorium, Inc.
  374 So. 2d 1124· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-09-12 ·cited 37×
  The court held that Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130 does not provide for an interlocutory appeal from an order vacating a clerk's default.
• Paine v. Lucas
  411 So. 2d 1369· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-04-07 ·cited 36×
  Paine, Webber sought a writ of certiorari to compel arbitration of a dispute arising from a Cash Fund Account, relying on an arbitration clause in a separate Client Commodity Account agreement. The Florida appellate court denied the writ, holding that the arbitration clause appli
• Vidal Sassoon, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Co.
  661 F.2d 272· 2d Cir.· 1981-10-07 ·cited 36×
  The court held that misrepresentations regarding consumer test methodology and results, which create a false impression of a product's competitive superiority, fall within the scope of § 43(a) of the Lanham Act and can support a preliminary injunction.
• Ives Labs., Inc. v. Darby Drug Co., Inc.
  601 F.2d 631· 2d Cir.· 1979-06-11 ·cited 36×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding it within the district court's discretion, despite the interesting questions raised regarding trademark and unfair competition law in the context of expired patents and drug imitation.
• Stamicarbon, N.V. v. Am. Cyanamid Co.
  506 F.2d 532· 2d Cir.· 1974-10-04 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction to compel in camera proceedings, as the contractual provisions did not clearly waive the right to a public trial and the potential for irreparable harm was speculative.
• Indian River Steamboat Co. v. E. Coast Transp. Co.
  28 Fla. 387· Fla.· 1891-06-01 ·cited 36×
  Indian River Steamboat Company sought a preliminary injunction preventing East Coast Transportation Company from landing steamboats at a dock in Titusville, Florida that Indian River had leased from a railroad company. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the dissolution of the inj
• Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Burford
  835 F.2d 305· D.C. Cir.· 1987-12-11 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by rejecting the exhaustion defense and that the preliminary injunction was improperly granted.
• First Brands Corp. v. Fred Meyer, Inc.
  809 F.2d 1378· 9th Cir.· 1987-02-06 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction for trade dress infringement, as the plaintiff failed to demonstrate probable success on the merits.