Permanent Injunction

757 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 75 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• C.L.A.S.S. Promotions, Inc. v. D.S. Magazines, Inc.
  753 F.2d 14· 2d Cir.· 1985-01-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly found no trademark infringement but erred in the scope of the injunction, remanding for revision.
• The Flipside v. Vill. OF Hoffman Ests.
  639 F.2d 373· 7th Cir.· 1981-01-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the ordinance is unconstitutionally vague because it fails to provide clear notice of what items are regulated, violating the due process clause.
• Fla. JAI Alai, Inc. v. S. Catering Servs., Inc.
  388 So. 2d 1076· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-09-24 ·cited 12×
  Florida Jai Alai, Inc. appeals a final judgment in a breach of concession agreement dispute with Southern Catering Services, Inc. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's findings regarding past disputes and monetary relief but reversed the permanent injunction against term
• Sinclair Ref. Co. v. Atkinson
  290 F.2d 312· 7th Cir.· 1961-04-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Section 301 of the LMRA does not preclude suits against individual employees for inducing or participating in a strike violating a no-strike clause, and that the Norris-LaGuardia Act bars injunctive relief for such strikes absent a specific statutory mandate.
• Walling v. Harnischfeger Corp.
  242 F.2d 712· 7th Cir.· 1957-04-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act does not automatically warrant dissolution of a permanent injunction, especially when no changed conditions are shown.
• Russell C. House Transfer & Storage Co., Inc. v. United States
  189 F.2d 349· 5th Cir.· 1951-05-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a broad injunction should be construed narrowly to apply only to the specific type of violation that led to its issuance, not to new, unrelated violations.
• Mitchell v. Wright
  154 F.2d 924· 5th Cir.· 1946-04-24 ·cited 12×·via Action For Permanent Injunction
  A state's judicial appeal process for voter registration denials is not a purely administrative remedy that must be exhausted before federal court intervention.
• Hock v. 250 N. AVE. Corp.
  142 F.2d 435· 2d Cir.· 1944-04-17 ·cited 12×
  The district court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a tenant's action seeking to enjoin an eviction based on alleged violations of rent regulations, as the Emergency Price Control Act only permits private suits for rent overcharges.
• Lorenz v. City of Hollywood
  144 Fla. 324· Fla.· 1940-10-01 ·cited 12×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that when parties initiate an equity action involving a public right of way dispute, the court of equity may retain jurisdiction and adjudicate all related rights, including legal claims ordinarily cognizable only at law, rather than remitting part
• Semple v. Nanci Semple
  763 So. 2d 484· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-07-05 ·cited 11×
  Raymond Semple appeals a domestic violence injunction and temporary custody award, claiming he was denied due process because the trial court failed to conduct a full evidentiary hearing before issuing the permanent injunction and awarding custody to his ex-wife. The court revers
• Trail Chevrolet, Inc. v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  381 F.2d 353· 5th Cir.· 1967-07-27 ·cited 11×
  The court held that while the injunction was largely proper, a specific provision was overly restrictive and required modification.
• Leader Ent. S.A. v. Crom Prods., LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-08 ·cited 10×
  Leader Entertainment S.A., an Argentinian children's entertainment company, sued Florida-based producers Crom Productions, LLC and Ancla Productions, Inc. for trademark infringement and unfair competition after they created and promoted a live children's show called "La Granja En
• Miguez v. Maryanka Miguez
  824 So. 2d 258· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-08-07 ·cited 10×
  Hugo Miguez appealed a trial court's extension of a domestic violence injunction from one year to seven years, arguing that such duration is erroneous as a matter of law. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Florida law permits domestic violence injunctions of indefinite du
• Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Am. Metals Exch. Corp.
  991 F.2d 71· 3d Cir.· 1993-04-08 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment but vacated the disgorgement orders, remanding for an evidentiary hearing to determine the appropriate amount of disgorgement based on ill-gotten gains.
• Scarbrough v. Meeks
  582 So. 2d 95· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-06-26 ·cited 10×
  John Scarbrough appeals a permanent injunction entered against him by the trial court, claiming violation of due process rights and improper denial of his motion to dismiss. The appellate court affirmed that the complaint states a cause of action for injunctive relief but reverse
• In re Chateaugay Corp. v. Chateaugay Corp.
  880 F.2d 1509· 2d Cir.· 1989-06-30 ·cited 10×
  The denial of a motion for relief from the automatic stay, even with provisions for interim relief and future reconsideration, is a final and appealable order.
• Coral Gables Invs., Inc. v. The Graham Cos.
  528 So. 2d 989· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-07-26 ·cited 10×
  Coral Gables Investments appeals an injunction enforcing a restrictive covenant that prohibits covering apartment building roofs with fiberglass shingles in the Miami Lakes subdivision. The court affirmed, holding that the covenant's requirement for architectural committee approv
• Bd. OF Trs. OF THE Internal Improvement Tr. Fund v. Walker Ranch Gen. P'ship
  496 So. 2d 153· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-08-21 ·cited 10×·via Permanent Injunctive Relief
  The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal resolved a jurisdictional boundary dispute between Polk and Osceola Counties regarding Lake Hatchineha. The court held that the ordinary high water line at 52.5 feet mean sea level, not the midpoint between high and low water marks as th
• United States ex rel. Vuitton ET Fils S.A. v. Klayminc
  780 F.2d 179· 2d Cir.· 1985-12-16 ·cited 10×
  The court should not have approved a sting operation conducted by private attorneys due to ethical concerns and lack of judicial oversight.
• Burrus v. Turnbo
  743 F.2d 693· 9th Cir.· 1984-09-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) mandates dismissal with prejudice if a receiving state returns a prisoner to the sending state before trial, regardless of the reason for the return or subsequent appellate reinstatement of the indictment.
• The Kan. Power & Light Co. v. Burlington N. R.R. Co.
  740 F.2d 780· 10th Cir.· 1984-07-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a contract for coal transportation rates could have been formed between KPL and BN, and that such a contract was not illegal per se under the statutory framework existing in 1972, especially considering the Staggers Rail Act of 1980.
• Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps OF Eng'rs
  732 F.2d 253· 2d Cir.· 1984-03-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in enjoining the State from spending its own funds on preliminary design and engineering work for the Westway project, as this prohibition was not supported by the prior orders or the partnership rationale.
• United States v. Landsberger
  692 F.2d 501· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the "Foreign Tax Haven Double Trust" scheme constituted an illegal anticipatory assignment of income, and affirmed the permanent injunction against it. The contempt order was vacated due to a factual error regarding the timing of one violation.
• Interstate Commerce Comm'n v. RIO Grande Growers Coop.
  564 F.2d 848· 9th Cir.· 1977-10-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Stan Anderson and San Joaquin Cooperative were properly found in civil contempt of a prior injunction against Rio Grande.
• City OF Miami Beach v. Herman
  346 So. 2d 122· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-05-24 ·cited 10×
  The City of Miami Beach appealed a permanent injunction preventing it from placing a rent control ordinance question on a March 8, 1977 ballot. The court affirmed the injunction, holding that the city violated its charter's requirement of a 60-day waiting period between petition
• Miller v. Bess MacGILL
  297 So. 2d 573· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-06-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the temporary injunction was erroneously granted because the appellees failed to prove facts entitling them to relief, and the landowner had a legal right to use the unzoned property for any lawful purpose.
• DOE v. Poelker
  497 F.2d 1063· 8th Cir.· 1974-06-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a plaintiff challenging a hospital's abortion policy has standing and the case is not moot, even if the plaintiff has already obtained an abortion.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Nat'l Bankers Life Ins. Co.
  477 F.2d 920· 5th Cir.· 1973-04-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the record contained ample evidence to establish that each appellant was sufficiently connected with the complex affair to support findings of involvement in past, present, or imminent future violations, justifying an injunction.
• Local Union 13410 v. United Mine Workers of Am.
  475 F.2d 906· D.C. Cir.· 1973-01-05 ·cited 10×
  A labor union's imposition of a trusteeship without a prior hearing is invalid unless an emergency situation reasonably necessitates immediate action, and even then, a hearing must be scheduled promptly thereafter. The disaffiliation vote is valid, and the union is entitled to da
• Captain Susan R. Struck v. Secretary OF Defense
  460 F.2d 1372· 9th Cir.· 1971-11-15 ·cited 10×·via Action For Permanent Injunction
  The petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc were denied.
• Roth v. Laird
  446 F.2d 855· 2d Cir.· 1971-06-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that discretionary decisions by military officials within their jurisdiction are not subject to judicial review unless they violate regulations or are arbitrary and irrational.
• Emerson D. Folk & Nat'l Bus. Forms, Inc. v. Wallace Bus. Forms, Inc.
  394 F.2d 240· 4th Cir.· 1968-04-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence supported the trial court's findings that the appellants violated a permanent injunction by indirectly employing former employees through a new company, and that the awarded civil contempt damages and attorneys' fees were proper.
• Brotherhood OF Railroad Trainmen v. S. Ry. Co.
  393 F.2d 303· 5th Cir.· 1968-04-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the unions' strike was a labor dispute under the Norris-LaGuardia Act, and the district court erred in issuing an injunction because the unions had followed the procedures of the Railway Labor Act and were free to resort to self-help.
• Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, Local 1416, AFL-CIO v. E. S.S. Lines, Inc.
  206 So. 2d 473· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-01-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that it was error to cancel an injunction bond and release the surety while a separate appeal from the final decree making the injunction permanent was still pending.
• Rutherford v. Am. Med. Ass'n
  379 F.2d 641· 7th Cir.· 1967-06-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that plaintiffs failed to state a claim under the civil rights statutes and had not demonstrated a good faith attempt to comply with the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act's new drug approval process, thus precluding judicial review.
• Switzerland Cheese Ass'n, Inc. v. E. Horne's Mkt., Inc.
  351 F.2d 552· 1st Cir.· 1965-10-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an interlocutory denial of a permanent injunction is not an appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).
• D A & S OIL Well Servicing, Inc. v. Mitchell
  262 F.2d 552· 10th Cir.· 1958-12-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that driving trucks carrying essential equipment to and from well sites constitutes an integral and indispensable part of the employees' principal activities and is therefore compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
• Textag Co., Inc. v. Hayslip
  192 F.2d 435· 5th Cir.· 1951-11-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendants' use of the 'Speed Check System' constituted infringement of the patent and violation of the injunction, and that the damages awarded were supported by the evidence.
• Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters v. Keystone Freight Lines, Inc.
  123 F.2d 326· 10th Cir.· 1941-10-24 ·cited 10×
  The denial of a labor union's motion to intervene in an injunction action against trucking companies was an error, but the appeal from that denial is moot because the union and its members were not bound by the subsequent injunction against the companies.
• Trans Health Mgmt. Inc. v. Nunziata
  159 So. 3d 850· Fla. 2d DCA· 2014-12-19 ·cited 9×
  In consolidated appeals arising from a nursing home resident's death, the court dismissed the final judgment appeal by Trans Health Management Inc. (THMI) because THMI, as an administratively dissolved corporation, was statutorily barred from prosecuting the appeal under Florida
• 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.
• Jeffries v. Jeffries
  133 So. 3d 1243· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-03-24 ·cited 9×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's permanent injunction because the record contained competent substantial evidence to support the finding of domestic violence.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Huff
  758 F. Supp. 2d 1288· S.D. Fla.· 2010-12-17 ·cited 9×
  The court amended its prior findings of fact and conclusions of law based on a motion for reconsideration, incorporating details from a seven-day bench trial and subsequent filings.
• Fla. Keys Citizens Coal., Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Eng'rs
  374 F. Supp. 2d 1116· S.D. Fla.· 2005-04-11 ·cited 9×·via Permanent Injunction Standard
  The court found that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the requested declaratory and injunctive relief against the federal agencies regarding the highway improvement project.
• Seminole Ent., Inc. v. City OF Casselberry
  866 So. 2d 1242· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-01-30 ·cited 9×
  A declaratory judgment action is the proper vehicle for facial constitutional challenges to an ordinance, and res judicata does not bar claims not previously litigated, even if related to the same ordinance.
• Int'l Vill. Ass'n, Inc. v. Stefan Schaaffee and Marlo Jones
  786 So. 2d 656· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-06-13 ·cited 9×
  A temporary injunction cannot stand alone as an independent lawsuit without a request for permanent relief.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Yun
  148 F. Supp. 2d 1287· M.D. Fla.· 2001-05-23 ·cited 9×
  The court ordered disgorgement of $269,000 jointly against both defendants, prejudgment interest, and civil penalties of $100,000 each, but denied the SEC's request for permanent injunctions.
• THE Florida BAR v. Davide
  702 So. 2d 184· Fla.· 1997-10-09 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the respondents engaged in the unlicensed practice of law and adopted the referee's recommendations for sanctions.
• Frank and Marie Robertia v. Pine Tree Water Control Dist.
  516 So. 2d 1012· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-12-02 ·cited 9×
  The Robertias appealed a permanent injunction granted to Pine Tree Water Control District allowing it to construct and maintain a drainage easement across their property. The appellate court reversed, finding that the language in the Robertias' deed was insufficient to reserve an
• Am. CAN Co. v. Ishwar Mansukhani
  814 F.2d 421· 7th Cir.· 1987-03-12 ·cited 9×
  The court held that res judicata did not bar supplemental injunctive relief and affirmed the district court's decision to supplement the permanent injunction to include the SK inks, finding substantial derivation from plaintiff's trade secrets.