Preliminary Injunction

3,388 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,537 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Crumble v. Blumthal
  549 F.2d 462· 7th Cir.· 1977-02-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying brokers leave to intervene and that the buyers should be considered for damages for humiliation and mental anguish.
• Squillacote v. Graphic Arts Int'l Union, AFL-CIO
  540 F.2d 853· 7th Cir.· 1976-06-30 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the district court's issuance of a preliminary injunction, finding reasonable cause to believe an unfair labor practice occurred and that the injunction was just and proper.
• Sostre v. Preiser
  519 F.2d 763· 2d Cir.· 1975-06-19 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the record was insufficient to determine the validity of the prison rules and the denial of the preliminary injunction.
• In re Fontainebleau Hotel Corp. v. Simon
  508 F.2d 1056· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-28 ·cited 20×
  The bankruptcy court has summary jurisdiction to issue an injunction compelling a telephone company to continue service to a debtor, even with pre-bankruptcy debts, to preserve the debtor's business assets.
• Smith v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  493 F.2d 1241· 10th Cir.· 1974-04-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction under Section 301(a) of the LMRA or Section 102 of the LMRDA to adjudicate disputes solely concerning internal union affairs, such as the interpretation of a union constitution regarding district mergers.
• Hollon v. Mathis Indep. Sch. Dist.
  491 F.2d 92· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction's scope, extending beyond the plaintiff's interest, was an abuse of discretion and that the case was moot due to the plaintiff's graduation.
• W. States Meat Packers Ass'n, Inc. v. Dunlop
  482 F.2d 1401· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1973-09-01 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the denial of preliminary injunctive relief and upheld the constitutional validity of the beef price freeze, finding no taking without just compensation, denial of due process, or unconstitutional discrimination.
• McGUIRE Shaft & Tunnel Corp. v. Local Union NO. 1791
  475 F.2d 1209· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1973-02-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that preliminary injunctions were authorized under the Economic Stabilization Act of 1970, and that the Norris-LaGuardia Act did not prohibit such injunctions against labor unions in this context.
• United States v. Christie Indus.
  465 F.2d 1002· 3d Cir.· 1972-08-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that shipping components that can be assembled into a fireworks kit, even if sold separately or with minor substitutions, violates a preliminary injunction. Promotional materials and sales practices targeting children also indicate awareness of the injunction's pur
• Aldena English v. Town OF Huntington
  448 F.2d 319· 2d Cir.· 1971-08-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the denial of preliminary relief was improper, and the case should be remanded for specific findings regarding class action status and the town's housing policies.
• Rosado v. Wyman
  437 F.2d 619· 2d Cir.· 1970-12-21 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the permanent injunction, holding that a justiciable controversy existed and that the state's revised welfare schedules did not adequately account for all prior items of need.
• United States v. Prof'l AIR Traffic Controllers Org. (Patco)
  438 F.2d 79· 2d Cir.· 1970-12-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in enjoining the FAA from taking disciplinary action against air traffic controllers who participated in an unlawful work stoppage.
• Smith v. Grady
  411 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1969-05-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction limiting picketing, the absolute prohibition on uttering any sounds was an abuse of discretion and must be modified to allow non-violent, non-threatening speech.
• Lankenau v. Coggeshall & Hicks
  350 F.2d 61· 2d Cir.· 1965-07-23 ·cited 20×
  A federal court, having appointed a receiver for a defendant's assets ancillary to an action under federal law, has the discretion to stay enforcement of a state court attachment, even if the attachment was levied before the receiver's appointment, if doing so is necessary to pro
• AIR Line Stewards & Stewardesses Ass'n, Local 550, TWU, AFL-CIO v. Transp. Workers Union OF Am.
  334 F.2d 805· 7th Cir.· 1964-07-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the issue of the trusteeship's legality was moot because the international union terminated it, and the district court lacked jurisdiction under the LMRDA to review the internal union procedure for removing an officer.
• Giancana v. Marlin W. Johnson
  335 F.2d 366· 7th Cir.· 1964-06-30 ·cited 20×
  The district court lacked jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to allege or demonstrate that the amount in controversy exceeded the statutory minimum, and also failed to identify a specific Act of Congress for the civil rights claim.
• Dymo Indus., Inc. v. Tapeprinter, Inc.
  326 F.2d 141· 9th Cir.· 1964-01-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction due to substantial doubt regarding the trademark's validity and insufficient showing of irreparable harm.
• The Cong. OF Racial Equal. v. Douglas
  318 F.2d 95· 5th Cir.· 1963-05-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was an unconstitutional abridgement of First Amendment rights and an abuse of discretion because there was no evidence that CORE intended to foment violence or that a clear and present danger existed.
• Fountain v. Hudson Cush-N-Foam Corp.
  122 So. 2d 232· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-07-11 ·cited 20×·via Temporary Injunction
  A temporary injunction restraining employment and disclosure of trade secrets is not unreasonable due to the absence of a territorial limitation, especially when the employee's knowledge is intertwined with their employment.
• Speedry Prods., Inc. v. DRI Mark Prods., Inc.
  271 F.2d 646· 2d Cir.· 1959-11-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of confusion as to source or product, and also failed to show irreparable harm, thus affirming the denial of a preliminary injunction.
• Borden Co. v. Odham
  121 So. 2d 625· Fla.· 1959-07-31 ·cited 20×·via Temporary Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the Milk Commission's authority to require milk distributors to accept all milk from their producers and pay Commission-fixed minimum prices for Class II and Class III milk. The court rejected constitutional challenges based on liberty of contract
• Riverbank Labs. v. Hardwood Prods. Corp.
  220 F.2d 465· 7th Cir.· 1955-03-18 ·cited 20×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that a foreign corporation is not subject to process in Illinois if it is not engaged in business there beyond the solicitation of orders to be accepted elsewhere.
• Kline v. The State Bev. Dep't OF Fla.
  77 So. 2d 872· Fla.· 1955-02-02 ·cited 20×·via Temporary Injunction
  Petitioners Paul Glasel and Marshall Kline sought a temporary and mandatory injunction to prevent the State Beverage Department from revoking Glasel's liquor license and to recover confiscated alcoholic beverages. The Florida Supreme Court held that while a liquor licensee is ent
• Land v. Dollar
  190 F.2d 623· D.C. Cir.· 1951-05-18 ·cited 20×
  Government officials and a corporation president are in contempt for disobeying court orders directing the transfer of stock shares, despite their belief the orders were erroneous.
• Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co. v. Bhd. of Ry. & S. S. Clerks
  188 F.2d 302· 7th Cir.· 1951-03-26 ·cited 20×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to issue a temporary injunction to prevent irreparable damage from the enforcement of Railway Adjustment Board awards, even though it lacked jurisdiction to interpret the underlying agreements.
• Giordano v. Radio Corp. of Am.
  183 F.2d 558· 3d Cir.· 1950-07-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to establish the jurisdictional amount for an individual claim, and the suit could not proceed as a class action.
• Fed. Tel. & Radio Corp. v. Fed. Television Corp.
  180 F.2d 250· 2d Cir.· 1950-02-28 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate sufficient likelihood of confusion or damage to warrant a preliminary injunction against the defendant's use of the name 'Federal'.
• Meiselman v. Paramount Film Distrib. Corp.
  180 F.2d 94· 4th Cir.· 1950-02-09 ·cited 20×
  The appellate court affirmed the denial of an interlocutory injunction, finding no abuse of discretion by the trial court.
• Woods v. Benson Hotel Corp.
  177 F.2d 543· 8th Cir.· 1949-11-11 ·cited 20×·via Motion For Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the Housing and Rent Act of 1947 did not require all listed services to be furnished for decontrol, but rather that services customary in the community be made available.
• Buscaglia v. Dist. Court of San Juan
  145 F.2d 274· 1st Cir.· 1944-10-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico's decision was a final decision, thus conferring appellate jurisdiction. The court also addressed the substantive issues of taxpayer standing and the nature of the appropriation.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Okin
  137 F.2d 862· 2d Cir.· 1943-08-18 ·cited 20×
• Mayo v. Florida Grapefruit Growers Protective Assn.
  112 Fla. 117· Fla.· 1933-10-02 ·cited 20×·via Temporary Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a circuit court's injunction that declared an arsenical spray statute unconstitutional as applied to grapefruit. The court held that the statute, which prohibited the use of arsenic on citrus trees and the sale of citrus fruit containing arsenic
• Shaw v. Palmer
  54 Fla. 490· Fla.· 1907-06-01 ·cited 20×·via Temporary Injunction
  Cherry Lake Turpentine Company sought to enjoin Palmer & Smith from dipping turpentine from boxes on their land, claiming trespass. The trial court dissolved the injunction after finding the defendants had an oral license under a three-year turpentine-sharing agreement with the c
• Salomon Cohen v. L'Engle
  24 Fla. 542· Fla.· 1888-06-01 ·cited 20×·via Motion For Preliminary Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court denied a motion for a preliminary injunction pending appeal in an equity case, holding that while it may possess inherent power to issue injunctions in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, such power should be exercised only when indispensable to protect a
• Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea
  129 So. 3d 1196· Fla. 2d DCA· 2014-01-17 ·cited 19×·via Motion For Preliminary Injunction
  Florida appellate court reversed a state court's temporary injunction that prohibited Gawker Media from publishing a report and video excerpts about professional wrestler Hulk Hogan's extramarital affair, holding that the injunction constituted an unconstitutional prior restraint
• Cohen Fin., LP v. Kmc/Ec II, LLC
  967 So. 2d 224· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-07-11 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  Cohen Financial appeals the denial of a temporary injunction to freeze loan proceeds as a broker's fee under a mortgage brokerage agreement. The court affirmed, holding that Cohen Financial failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits because it did not a
• Sandlake Residences, LLC v. Ogilvie
  951 So. 2d 117· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-03-16 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  Sandlake Residences appealed a trial court's grant of a temporary injunction requiring it to keep an entrance gate open and remove speed bumps from a permanent access road. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed, finding the trial court misinterpreted the easement agreement
• DiCHRISTOPHER v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs
  908 So. 2d 492· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-06-10 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  DiChristopher appealed the dismissal of his request for a temporary injunction to stop Brevard County's mosquito control flooding of his property. The Fifth District affirmed the trial court's denial, holding that DiChristopher had an adequate remedy at law through inverse condem
• Morgan v. Herff Jones, Inc.
  883 So. 2d 309· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-08-25 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  Terry Morgan challenges a temporary injunction issued by the circuit court that restrained him from competing with Herff Jones, Inc. and using the trade name Delmar Studios. The appellate court reversed the non-compete injunction but affirmed the injunction against use of the tra
• Edward Supinski, M.D. v. Omni Healthcare, P.A.
  853 So. 2d 526· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-08-29 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  Dr. Supinski appeals a temporary injunction enforcing a noncompetition covenant in his employment agreement with Omni Healthcare. The appellate court affirmed the injunction as meeting all legal requirements for temporary injunctive relief, but remanded for reconsideration of the
• Kanter v. Kanter
  850 So. 2d 682· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-07-30 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  In this family law appeal, the husband challenges a trial court order that enjoined dissipation of marital assets and required resumption of temporary support payments to the wife. The court affirms, finding no fundamental error apparent on the face of the order and holding that
• City OF Ormond Beach v. City OF Daytona Beach
  794 So. 2d 660· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-07-20 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  The City of Ormond Beach appealed the dissolution of a temporary injunction it had sought against the City of Daytona Beach's annexation of property. The court affirmed the dissolution, holding that municipalities cannot contract away their constitutional and statutory power to a
• Harrison v. Palm Harbor MRI, Inc.
  703 So. 2d 1117· Fla. 2d DCA· 1997-11-12 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  An employee challenged a temporary injunction enforcing a noncompete agreement, arguing the covenant should be void due to the employer's sexual harassment. The appellate court found the procedural requirements for the injunction were satisfied, but reversed because the trial cou
• Spaulding v. Est. of Seth N. Frey
  666 So. 2d 935· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-12-22 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that arguments raised on a motion to dissolve a temporary injunction are limited to issues not previously litigated or appealable from the original injunction order.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Cherif
  933 F.2d 403· 7th Cir.· 1991-04-29 ·cited 19×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court held that the misappropriation theory applies to Rule 10b-5 violations, and a former employee's breach of a continuing duty to protect confidential information constitutes fraud. The court also found that subject matter jurisdiction does not extend to a non-party like S
• Gen. Comm. of Adjustment v. CSX R.R. Corp.
  893 F.2d 584· 3d Cir.· 1990-01-05 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the dispute over the sale of a rail line was a "minor" dispute under the Railway Labor Act because it was arguable that existing agreements and past practices could resolve the issue, thus requiring arbitration by the National Railroad Adjustment Board.
• Tucker Anthony Realty Corp. v. Schlesinger
  888 F.2d 969· 2d Cir.· 1989-11-06 ·cited 19×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction, even though it applied a higher fiduciary standard than required, because the plaintiffs demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
• Jamlynn Invs. Corp. v. San Marco Residences of Marco Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  544 So. 2d 1080· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-06-09 ·cited 19×·via Temporary Injunction
  A commercial lessee of a condominium unit sought a temporary injunction to prevent the condominium association from eliminating its allocated parking spaces. The trial court denied the motion based on lack of standing, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the lessee had
• Twelve John Does v. Dist. OF Columbia
  841 F.2d 1133· D.C. Cir.· 1988-03-11 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the district court erred in reinstating the Attorney General under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) because the prior dismissal order did not have prospective application and the circumstances did not constitute extraordinary grounds for relief.
• Brunswick Corp. v. Spinit Reel Co.
  832 F.2d 513· 10th Cir.· 1987-10-15 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the shape of the Zebco Model 33 reel cover is nonfunctional and that there was a likelihood of confusion, affirming the Lanham Act violation. The court also affirmed the rejection of the laches defense.