Mandatory Injunction

564 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 26 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Souder v. Tobriner
  314 F.2d 272· D.C. Cir.· 1963-02-07
  The court held that the record clearly indicated the appellant's disability was incurred in the line of duty, and thus summary judgment should have been granted in his favor.
• Union Corp. OF Am. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  309 F.2d 93· 8th Cir.· 1962-10-19
  The court held that the appellant was required to continue filing annual reports under Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, even after de-registering some stock, until the aggregate value of registered securities fell below $1,000,000.
• Frank J. Conrad et ux. v. Whitney
  141 So. 2d 796· Fla. 2d DCA· 1962-05-09
  A riparian owner cannot disavow a plat in part to their benefit while repudiating parts that would injure others, especially when filling a natural waterway.
• Jones v. City OF N. Miami
  19 Fla. Supp. 169· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1962-03-02
  Homeowners challenged a city zoning ordinance and deed restrictions affecting a subdivision. The court upheld the zoning ordinance as valid under the "fairly debatable" doctrine but enjoined the developer from operating businesses open to the general public, interpreting deed res
• Meyer Herschberg and Max I. Herschberg v. Fla. Power & Light Co.
  137 So. 2d 834· Fla. 3d DCA· 1962-02-15
  Property owners sought a mandatory injunction to remove transmission line anchors installed by a power company under a limited license granted by their predecessor. The court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that while the license was revocable, it was only conditiona
• Aitkins v. Atwood
  124 So. 2d 31· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-11-03
  A homeowner built a treehouse in her yard and received variances from the city's Board of Adjustment to keep it despite neighbor objections. Neighbors sued the city and homeowner in circuit court; after the city was dismissed, the court wrongly refused to strike irrelevant allega
• Sunny Isles Shopping Ctr., Inc. v. Mannheimer
  117 So. 2d 433· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-01-25
• Pfaff v. Burgess
  275 F.2d 163· D.C. Cir.· 1960-01-07
  The court held that it would be inequitable to compel the removal of windows from a party wall when the current owners purchased the property without notice of an agreement to remove them upon request.
• Ives v. Franke
  271 F.2d 469· D.C. Cir.· 1959-09-17
  The court held that the Secretary of the Navy lawfully prescribed regulations for discharge certificates, and the plaintiff was not entitled to an honorable discharge based on proficiency requirements.
• William v. Robbins
  269 F.2d 242· D.C. Cir.· 1959-07-02
  The court held that a prisoner seeking to challenge a parole revocation based on procedural due process violations can bring a declaratory judgment action in the District of Columbia, even if habeas corpus might otherwise be considered.
• Bantel v. Brownell
  234 F.2d 692· D.C. Cir.· 1956-06-07
  The court held that General License No. 94 did not remove German citizens from the 'enemy' category for purposes of the Trading With the Enemy Act, nor did it prevent the Attorney General from vesting their property.
• Murphey v. McKAY
  233 F.2d 697· D.C. Cir.· 1956-05-10
  The court held that the Secretary of the Interior correctly determined that the lease extension application was timely and properly granted.
• Rosenblum v. Neisnee Bros., Inc.
  231 F.2d 322· 7th Cir.· 1956-02-21
  The court held that the lease provision allowing the lessee to make "alterations and changes" necessary for its purposes permitted the construction of a third-floor addition, as the lease covered the entire building and the addition did not destroy the building's identity.
• Auber v. Easton
  9 Fla. Supp. 183· Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1955-12-12
  The court held that the building, with slump brick exterior walls, substantially complied with the covenant requiring CBS construction, and denied equitable relief.
• Wendel v. Spencer
  217 F.2d 858· D.C. Cir.· 1954-12-02
  The court held that the Commission has the power to determine if an applicant's diploma is from a legitimate national examining board, even if multiple such boards exist.
• State ex rel. Rd. Dep't v. S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co.
  4 Fla. Supp. 1· Duval Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1953-05-26 ·via Temporary Mandatory Injunction
  Southern Bell sought relief from a mandatory injunction requiring it to remove and relocate its telephone facilities from a state highway construction project. The court granted the State Road Department's motion to strike Southern Bell's affirmative defenses and held that Southe
• Dade Cnty. v. S. Bell Tel. &. Tel. Co.
  4 Fla. Supp. 11· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1953-05-15
  Circuit court stayed proceedings pending resolution of a parallel test case in Duval County involving the same legal question of whether a telephone company must bear the cost of relocating its facilities for federal highway construction.
• Oehm v. Michigan-Wisconsin Pipe Line Co.
  199 F.2d 253· 7th Cir.· 1952-10-10
  The court held that the July 27, 1949 contract for a right-of-way was valid and binding, and that the defendant's subsequent installation of a pipeline on a different right-of-way did not create a new valid agreement, thus requiring compensation.
• Rattley v. Irelan
  197 F.2d 585· D.C. Cir.· 1952-04-15
  The court held that Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, stating an offense 'may be prosecuted by information' if indictment is waived, does not obligate the United States Attorney to prosecute by information.
• United States v. Olds
  193 F.2d 377· 5th Cir.· 1951-12-14
  The court held that the defendant must make restitution for overcharges, as he should not profit from using an invalid priority to obtain materials and sell houses above the intended maximum price.
• Woods v. Babcock
  185 F.2d 508· D.C. Cir.· 1950-11-24
  The court held that the City Council's resolution to terminate federal rent control was invalid because it did not comply with the City Charter's requirements for legislative action, specifically publication, posting, and a 30-day waiting period for a referendum.
• Smith v. Wilson
  171 F.2d 824· D.C. Cir.· 1948-11-08
  The court held that the trial court's finding of fact regarding the grantor's intent was not clearly erroneous and thus affirmed the decision.
• Cassimus v. Ellrich Homes Co.
  158 Fla. 499· Fla.· 1947-02-14
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decree awarding a mandatory injunction due to material discrepancies between the alleged facts, the court's findings, and the parties' understanding, which were not addressed by the Chancellor. The court also noted the potential
• Bonds v. Smith
  143 F.2d 369· D.C. Cir.· 1944-06-12
  An unprobated will can be admitted into evidence to show privity of estate for adverse possession purposes, even if not sufficient to prove title.
• Kersh Lake Drainage Dist. v. State Bank & Tr. Co. of Wellston
  138 F.2d 486· 8th Cir.· 1943-10-26
  The court held that the district's motion to wind up the receivership and dissolve the injunction was without merit, as the prior appellate decision affirming the decree was binding and the district court correctly applied Arkansas law regarding mandatory injunctions.
• S. J. Groves & Sons Co. v. Warren
  135 F.2d 264· D.C. Cir.· 1943-04-19
  The court held that a contractor cannot use a mandatory injunction to compel payment of a disputed claim against the government when the dispute involves a question of law, and an adequate remedy exists in the Court of Claims.
• O'Higgins v. Andreu
  150 Fla. 330· Fla.· 1942-04-07
  O'Higgins, a lawful liquor dealer in a wet county, challenges the seizure and confiscation of his entire truck of liquor because one portion was being delivered to a customer in a dry county. The Florida Supreme Court held that only the specifically contraband liquor (the portion
• Willis v. Phillips
  147 Fla. 368· Fla.· 1941-05-30
  A Florida property owner sought a mandatory injunction to compel the Board of County Commissioners to remove a ditch and culvert constructed as part of road improvements, claiming the water drainage damaged his crops. The court upheld the denial of the injunction, finding that th
• Harrington v. City of Pompano
  118 F.2d 240· 5th Cir.· 1941-03-07
  The court held that the excluded landowners must be heard before their property can be declared taxable for the city's bonds.
• Williams v. Hickson
  98 Fla. 544· Fla.· 1929-10-03
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decision to sustain a demurrer and dismiss a property owner's complaint seeking a mandatory injunction. The court found the second amended bill of complaint adequately alleged the requirements for establishing a prescriptive ease
• The State of Fla. ex rel. The State Live Stock Sanitary Bd. of the State of Fla. v. Graddick
  82 Fla. 15· Fla.· 1921-06-18
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued against a private individual to compel compliance with administrative regulations requiring cattle dipping to eradicate ticks, even when authorized by statute, because mandamus historically applies only to pu