Overbroad Injunction

33 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Florio v. State of Fla. ex rel. A. L. Epperson
  119 So. 2d 305· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-04-06 ·cited 73×
  Property owners around Egypt Lake sought to enjoin water skiing operations conducted by the Florios at Ralston Beach and by McDonald's ski school, alleging a public nuisance. The court found a nuisance existed but reversed the injunction as overly broad and wrongfully discriminat
• Health Clubs, Inc. v. The State of Fla. ex rel. Robert Eagan
  377 So. 2d 28· Fla. 5th DCA· 1979-11-07 ·cited 32×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed an overbroad public nuisance injunction against a health club that prohibited all commingling of opposite sexes, even for lawful purposes, but affirmed contempt convictions for violating the injunction while the appeal was pending.
• Gweldon Lee Paschall and All Intervenors v. The Kan. City Star Co.
  695 F.2d 322· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the newspaper's change to an agency distribution system, based on legitimate business justifications and producing no unreasonable anticompetitive effects, did not violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
• Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesell-Schaft v. Rickard
  492 F.2d 474· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-10 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the district court's findings of trademark infringement and unfair competition were supported by substantial evidence, but modified the injunctive decree to remove overbroad restrictions.
• Spiegel v. City OF Houston
  636 F.2d 997· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was overly broad and reversed its issuance, remanding for revision.
• Goodell v. Goodell
  421 So. 2d 736· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-11-10 ·cited 20×
  A former wife appealed her contempt conviction for violating a perpetual injunction in a divorce decree that prohibited harassment, hurting, or molesting her former husband. The court affirmed the contempt finding and held that perpetual injunctions in domestic relations cases ar
• Pub. Interest Research Grp. OF NEW Jersey, Inc. v. Powell Duffryn Terminals Inc.
  913 F.2d 64· 3d Cir.· 1990-08-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' alleged injuries were not sufficiently traceable to the defendant's specific discharge to establish constitutional standing, despite the defendant's egregious pollution record.
• E. & J. Gallo Winery v. Gallo Cattle Co.
  955 F.2d 1327· 9th Cir.· 1992-02-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that Joseph's counterclaims were barred by res judicata and that his use of the "Joseph Gallo" name on cheese infringed the Winery's trademarks, but affirmed the modification of the injunction.
• Molex v. Nolen
  759 F.2d 474· 5th Cir.· 1985-05-06 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the trial court's judgment and injunction, modifying only a minor aspect of the injunction's wording regarding Tandy affiliates.
• U.S. Mfg. & Galvanizing Corp. v. Renfrow
  592 So. 2d 1216· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-01-28 ·cited 15×
  USMGC appealed the denial of dissolution of a temporary injunction that closed its facility and required removal of hazardous waste. The court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in maintaining the injunction despite evidence of hazardous waste rem
• Seminole Cnty. v. Mertz
  415 So. 2d 1286· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-05-26 ·cited 15×
  Seminole County and Magnolia Service Corporation appealed a permanent injunction prohibiting surface water flow onto the Mertz property, claiming the trial court misapplied Florida water law. The court affirmed the injunction, finding that the developers unlawfully diverted diffu
• Krapacs v. Nisha E. Bacchus
  301 So. 3d 976· Fla. 4th DCA· 2020-08-12 ·cited 12×
  Ashley Krapacs appeals a stalking injunction entered by the trial court in favor of attorney Nisha Bacchus. Krapacs had posted disparaging comments about Bacchus on social media, including tagging her repeatedly. The appellate court reversed the injunction, finding that Krapacs's
• Bull Motors, LLC. v. Brown
  152 So. 3d 32· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-11-05 ·cited 9×
  The court held that a permanent mandatory injunction was improperly entered without an evidentiary hearing and was overly broad, exceeding the scope of relief sought.
• Stertz v. Gulf OIL Corp.
  783 F.2d 1064· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1986-01-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was not overbroad and that the Department of Energy was not entitled to interest on the bond posted by Gulf Oil.
• Smith v. Short
  332 So. 3d 1064· Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-12-29 ·cited 7×
  The appellate court reversed an injunction restricting social media activity and an award of attorney's fees, finding the injunction overbroad and the fee award lacking sufficient evidentiary support. The court affirmed other aspects of the trial court's order enforcing a marital
• Brinson v. State
  215 So. 3d 1260· Fla. 5th DCA· 2017-03-31 ·cited 7×
  Larry Brinson appeals a postconviction court order banning all of his pro se filings in the circuit court. The appellate court reversed the order as overbroad, holding that while the court could prohibit pro se filings attacking his specific criminal judgment, the blanket ban on
• Adoption HOT Line, Inc. v. State
  402 So. 2d 1307· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-08-18 ·cited 7×
  Adoption Hot Line, Inc. challenged a permanent injunction prohibiting all advertising of adoption referral services. The court reversed, holding that the injunction violated the First Amendment because it was broader than necessary to prevent unlawful activity under Florida's ado
• Potter v. Houston Gulf Coast Bldg. Trades Council, AFL-CIO
  482 F.2d 837· 5th Cir.· 1973-08-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court's injunction was overbroad by prohibiting peaceful primary picketing, which is a protected activity under the NLRA, and modified the injunction accordingly.
• City of Miami v. Airbnb
  260 So. 3d 478· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-12-05 ·cited 5×
  The temporary injunction against the City's vacation rental ban was reversed as overbroad because Miami 21, which predated the state preemption statute's June 1, 2011 cutoff, is not preempted and permits short-term rentals as long as the property's predominant use remains permane
• Givens v. Holmes
  241 So. 3d 232· Fla. 2d DCA· 2018-03-07 ·cited 4×
  The injunction against stalking was properly granted, but the 500-foot buffer zone provision was overbroad and violated the appellant's constitutional property rights because it prevented him from accessing his own residence and property. The court reversed the buffer zone provis
• Tom Wood and wife v. Dozier
  529 So. 2d 1236· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-08-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in entering an overbroad mandatory injunction without an evidentiary hearing on disputed issues regarding the number of units permissible per building under the restrictive covenant.
• The 4245 Corp. v. The City OF Oakland Park
  473 So. 2d 12· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-07-17 ·cited 4×
  The court reversed a permanent injunction that shut down an entire business for lewdness violations, holding that the injunction was overbroad and that the trial court should have limited relief to the illegal acts while allowing the business to operate legitimately.
• M & E Distribs., Inc. v. Worley
  840 So. 2d 457· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-03-26 ·cited 2×
  M & E Distributors and Mark Martone appealed a temporary injunction prohibiting them from using the name 'Worley's Wonder' to market their own cleaning product. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the injunction, finding sufficient evidence of trademark infringement and
• F. H. Vahlsing, Inc. v. United States
  367 F.2d 577· 5th Cir.· 1966-10-26 ·cited 2×
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the marketing order, which the injunction was based upon, has been terminated.
• Austin v. MID State Fire Equip. OF Cent. Fla., Inc.
  727 So. 2d 1097· Fla. 5th DCA· 1999-03-05 ·cited 1×
  William Austin appeals a temporary injunction enforcing his non-compete agreement with his former employer, Mid State Fire Equipment. The court affirmed the injunction's bar on soliciting customers and disclosing pricing information but reversed the portion prohibiting Austin fro
• Stache Prods., LLC v. Green Bros. Wholesale Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-08
  The court granted the motion for a permanent injunction with modifications, finding the proposed language overbroad and not fully compliant with Rule 65.
• Mays v. JOE Taylor Restoration, Inc.
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2022-08-24
• Mays v. JOE Taylor Restoration, Inc.
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2022-08-24
  A temporary injunction restricting speech based on tortious interference with business relationships may be upheld when the prerequisites are met and the limited exception to prior restraint applies, but the trial court must make explicit findings on the public interest element,
• Signal Outdoor Advertising v. Metro. Sytstems, Inc.
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-06-16
  This case involves an appeal of a trial court's injunction. The appellate court reversed one part of the injunction for being overbroad but affirmed the rest.
• Latonya Holton v. Holton
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2020-06-25
  An injunction for protection against domestic violence based on alleged cyber-stalking through social media posts must be supported by sufficient factual findings and cannot be broader than necessary to provide relief.
• IDS Long Distance, Inc. v. Heiffer
  819 So. 2d 949· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-06-26
  The court held that while the initial ex parte request for an injunction was improper, the subsequent motion to dissolve rendered the notice issue moot. However, the injunction was correctly dissolved because it was overbroad.
• Westmoreland Coal Co., Inc. v. Int'l Union
  910 F.2d 130· 4th Cir.· 1990-08-06
  The court held that the district court erred by not factually finding the cause of the work stoppage and that the work stoppage was not subject to the Boys Markets injunction exception.