Preliminary Injunction

3,388 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,538 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• In the Matters of Webcor, Inc.
  392 F.2d 893· 7th Cir.· 1968-02-07 ·cited 16×·via Injunction Pendente Lite
  The court held that the referee did not abuse his discretion in adjudicating the corporations bankrupt and confirming the sale of assets, as the corporations had ample time to file a plan and the sale was conducted properly.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. S & P Nat'l Corp.
  360 F.2d 741· 2d Cir.· 1966-05-10 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the district court's orders granting a preliminary injunction and appointing a receiver, finding no clear error in the factual findings, application of law, or abuse of discretion, subject to a modification for a tax problem.
• United States v. An Undetermined Number of Shipping Packages
  345 F.2d 864· 3d Cir.· 1965-05-27 ·cited 16×
  The court held that promotional literature seized in a warehouse, not yet distributed or shipped in interstate commerce, does not constitute 'labeling' subject to condemnation under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Additionally, an injunction prohibiting sales to all pri
• Clement Beckman v. Local NO. 46 Int'l Ass'n OF Bridge
  314 F.2d 848· 7th Cir.· 1963-03-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to grant a preliminary injunction based on allegations of voting rights violations under Title I of the LMRDA, and that such allegations were sufficient to warrant the injunction.
• Armour & Co. v. Freeman
  304 F.2d 404· D.C. Cir.· 1962-02-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Secretary of Agriculture's regulation requiring genuine hams with added moisture to be labeled "Imitation Ham" was arbitrary and capricious on its face, forcing a violation of the Meat Inspection Act.
• Williams Meyers v. Railroad
  288 F.2d 356· 2d Cir.· 1961-04-03 ·cited 16×
  The appeal is not moot because the $50,000 bond posted to secure the injunction creates a live controversy regarding potential recovery. The injunction properly issued, requiring the railroad to continue operations until the ICC certificate became effective.
• LOS Angeles Tr. Deed & Mortg. Exch. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  264 F.2d 199· 9th Cir.· 1959-02-17 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction and appointment of a receiver were improperly granted due to procedural errors and insufficient evidence of fraud or insolvency, requiring reversal.
• Meyers v. Railroad
  259 F.2d 532· 2d Cir.· 1958-10-07 ·cited 16×
• Mitchell v. Riegel Textile, Inc.
  259 F.2d 954· D.C. Cir.· 1958-10-02 ·cited 16×
  The court held that plaintiffs are liable for the full amount of their wage underpayments, not limited to the bond amounts, as they were unjustly enriched by the erroneous injunction.
• Octavia Lowe v. Jacobs
  243 F.2d 432· 5th Cir.· 1957-04-22 ·cited 16×
  A state court loses all jurisdiction over a case once it has been properly removed to federal court, until a remand order is issued.
• Finton J. Phelan, Jr. v. Taitano
  233 F.2d 117· 9th Cir.· 1956-04-10 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the appellants' complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, affirming the dismissal of their action.
• The Fla. Cent. & Peninsular R.R. Co. v. Williams
  45 Fla. 295· Fla.· 1903-01-01 ·cited 16×·via Temporary Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court dismissed an appeal from a contempt order, holding that no appeal lies from a Circuit Court order imposing a fine for violating an injunction. The court clarified that contempt orders are not reviewable on appeal except by habeas corpus for jurisdictiona
• Lewton v. Hower
  18 Fla. 872· Fla.· 1882-01-01 ·cited 16×
  Hower sought to enjoin the sheriff from selling his homestead property under execution on a judgment obtained by Lewton. The Florida Supreme Court held that land acquired as a federal homestead is exempt from forced sale to satisfy debts incurred before the patent issued, and tha
• Planned Parenthood OF Greater Orlando, Inc. v. MMB Props.
  211 So. 3d 918· Fla.· 2017-02-23 ·cited 15×·via Temporary Injunction
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a trial court abuses its discretion by requiring a party to demonstrate changed circumstances as a threshold requirement before modifying or dissolving a temporary injunction when clear legal error or misapprehension of facts is shown. The Cour
• City OF Miami Beach v. Kuoni Destination Mgmt., Inc.
  81 So. 3d 530· Fla. 3d DCA· 2012-02-08 ·cited 15×·via Temporary Injunction
  The City of Miami Beach appealed a temporary injunction preventing it from closing a private birthday party at a residential property, claiming the event violated the city's commercial use ordinance. The appellate court found the issue moot because the party had already occurred
• Yachting Promotions, Inc. v. Broward Yachts, Inc.
  792 So. 2d 660· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-08-29 ·cited 15×·via Preliminary Injunction Requirements
  Yachting Promotions appealed from a preliminary injunction requiring it to allow Broward Marine to exhibit at the Fort Lauderdale International Boat Show. The Fourth DCA reversed, holding that Broward Marine failed to establish a likelihood of success on its constitutional access
• Siegel v. LePore
  120 F. Supp. 2d 1041· S.D. Fla.· 2000-11-13 ·cited 15×
  Federal courts should not intervene preliminarily in state election procedures, as the state's interest in conducting its elections and the potential for federal overreach outweigh the plaintiffs' speculative claims of injury from manual recounts.
• Duke v. Cleland
  954 F.2d 1526· 11th Cir.· 1992-02-11 ·cited 15×
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that the appellants were unlikely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the exclusion of David Duke from the Republican presidential preference primary ballot violated their First
• U.S. Mfg. & Galvanizing Corp. v. Renfrow
  592 So. 2d 1216· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-01-28 ·cited 15×·via Temporary Injunction
  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
• Associated Gen. Contractors OF Cal., Inc. v. Coal. FOR Econ. Equity
  950 F.2d 1401· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-06 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court properly denied AGCC's request for preliminary injunctive relief because AGCC failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits and a possibility of irreparable harm.
• Temple Univ. v. White
  941 F.2d 201· 3d Cir.· 1991-07-30 ·cited 15×
  The court held that Pennsylvania's Medicaid payment rates were invalid because the state failed to make required findings on their reasonableness and adequacy, and affirmed the district court's injunctive relief.
• 281-300 Joint Venture v. Onion
  938 F.2d 35· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-12 ·cited 15×·via Motion For Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action on prudential grounds and properly refused to enjoin the RTC's foreclosure sale, as statutory provisions and agency determinations barred such relief.
• Nutrition 21 v. The United States
  930 F.2d 867· Fed. Cir.· 1991-03-29 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to set forth adequate findings of fact to support the preliminary injunction, necessitating its vacation.
• Opticians Ass'n OF Am. v. Indep. Opticians OF Am.
  920 F.2d 187· 3d Cir.· 1990-11-29 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a preliminary injunction because the trademark registrations were incontestable and the defendant failed to present a valid defense, thus the plaintiff was likely to succeed on the merits and suffer irreparable harm.
• Snook v. Tr. Co. OF Ga. Bank OF Savannah, N.A.
  909 F.2d 480· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-21 ·cited 15×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate irreparable harm, despite a likelihood of success on the merits.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Unifund SAL & Tamanaco Saudi & Gulf Inv. Grp.
  910 F.2d 1028· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-03 ·cited 15×
  The court affirmed the preliminary injunction's freeze on accounts and preservation of records, but vacated the prohibition on future violations due to insufficient evidence. It found personal jurisdiction and proper service existed, and that the evidence supported a strong prima
• Salsbury Labs., Inc. v. Merieux Labs., Inc.
  908 F.2d 706· 11th Cir.· 1990-07-24 ·cited 15×
  The court held that Salsbury's multi-step process for producing its vaccine constituted a trade secret under Georgia law and that the defendants misappropriated this trade secret, making them liable.
• CC Distribs., Inc. v. United States
  883 F.2d 146· D.C. Cir.· 1989-08-22 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the plaintiffs had standing to challenge the Air Force's decision to convert COCESS operations and that the decision was not committed to unreviewable agency discretion.
• Atwood Turnkey Drilling, Inc. v. Petroleo Brasileiro, S.A.
  875 F.2d 1174· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-27 ·cited 15×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to hear the appeal of a preliminary injunction and that the injunction was properly granted. Petrobras is not immune from suit due to a waiver of sovereign immunity in the contract.
• Mervin Stetson Langford v. Rotech Oxygen & Med. Equip., Inc.
  541 So. 2d 1267· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-03-16 ·cited 15×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that a temporary injunction was improperly issued because the moving party failed to demonstrate a clear legal right or a basis for trade secret appropriation or tortious interference.
• William Lowary & Sara Wyatt v. Lexington Local Bd. OF Educ.
  854 F.2d 131· 6th Cir.· 1988-08-11 ·cited 15×
  The court held that it was an abuse of discretion for the district court to allow agency fees to be collected and placed in an escrow account when it found the procedures likely unconstitutional.
• Friends OF THE Earth v. United States Navy
  841 F.2d 927· 9th Cir.· 1988-03-07 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the National Defense Authorization Act prohibits construction until all required permits, including the Washington Shoreline Management Act permit, are issued, and that the environmental groups have standing to seek an injunction.
• Alachua Cnty. v. Lewis OIL Co., Inc.
  516 So. 2d 1033· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-12-09 ·cited 15×·via Temporary Injunction
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's grant of a temporary injunction, finding no abuse of discretion.
• Hypertherm, Inc. v. Precision Prods., Inc.
  832 F.2d 697· 1st Cir.· 1987-11-06 ·cited 15×
  The court held that while a preliminary injunction was warranted, its scope was overly broad by prohibiting any descriptive use of the plaintiff's name and product numbers.
• Premier Dental Prods. Co. v. Darby Dental Supply Co., Inc.
  794 F.2d 850· 3d Cir.· 1986-06-24 ·cited 15×
  The court held that an exclusive distributor who has developed separate goodwill in the United States for a foreign-manufactured product can own the U.S. trademark and is entitled to protection under Section 526 of the Tariff Act of 1930 against the importation of genuine goods b
• Marcy Smiga v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.
  766 F.2d 698· 2d Cir.· 1985-06-28 ·cited 15×
  The court affirmed the district court's confirmation of the arbitration award and its award of attorneys' fees and costs, finding that the district court had jurisdiction and that the opposition to confirmation was frivolous.
• Treasure Salvors, Inc. v. Unidentified
  556 F. Supp. 1319· S.D. Fla.· 1983-01-18 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the arrest of salvaged property in rem provided the district court with jurisdiction over the salvage operation, and that Captain Jordan's actions constituted a breach of his contract with Treasure Salvors.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. G. Weeks Sec., Inc.
  678 F.2d 649· 6th Cir.· 1982-05-19 ·cited 15×
  The court held that issuing a preliminary injunction based on disputed factual issues without allowing live testimony constitutes an abuse of discretion, but an injunction based on legal conclusions from documentary evidence is permissible.
• Winfield v. ST. JOE Paper Co.
  663 F.2d 1031· 11th Cir.· 1981-12-14 ·cited 15×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the partial summary judgment was not certified as final and the denial of the preliminary injunction was not properly before the court.
• Chas. T. Main Int'l, Inc. v. Khuzestan Water & Power Auth.
  651 F.2d 800· 1st Cir.· 1981-05-22 ·cited 15×
  The court found that the President had adequate Congressional authority under IEEPA to settle the claim, making the question of inherent Article II power unnecessary.
• Bradford Sorenson and Gail Sorenson v. Raymond
  532 F.2d 496· 5th Cir.· 1976-06-01 ·cited 15×
  An out-of-court admission that conduct was motivated by racial prejudice can be explained away in court, and a jury verdict finding race was not a significant factor will be upheld if supported by evidence.
• United States (Plaintiff in D.C.) v. Commonwealth OF Pa.
  533 F.2d 107· 3d Cir.· 1976-03-26 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the denial of a preliminary injunction was proper because the Commonwealth failed to demonstrate irreparable injury from the withholding of Medicaid funds.
• State OF Wyo. v. Hathaway
  525 F.2d 66· 10th Cir.· 1975-10-28 ·cited 15×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the trial court's decision.
• NEW York Pathological & X-Ray Labs., Inc. v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  523 F.2d 79· 2d Cir.· 1975-08-18 ·cited 15×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The dissent argues that the INS's designation of approved facilities for alien medical examinations did not require notice and a hearing under the APA or the Fifth Amendment. The appellant had no protected property interest in continued referrals.
• Muss v. City OF Miami Beach
  312 So. 2d 553· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-05-13 ·cited 15×·via Temporary Injunction
• Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Parkway Towers Condo. Ass'n
  281 So. 2d 68· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-08-01 ·cited 15×·via Temporary Injunction
  A county has the common law right to place a governmental facility where it directs, notwithstanding zoning classifications, unless there is an affirmative showing of waiver in the zoning ordinance.
• The Robert Stigwood Grp. Ltd. v. Sperber
  457 F.2d 50· 2d Cir.· 1972-03-17 ·cited 15×
  The court held that performing songs from a copyrighted opera in sequence, without costumes or scenery but with gestures and role-playing, constitutes a dramatic performance infringing the copyright, and that advertising such performances as being from the opera constitutes unfai
• Nw. Airlines, Inc. v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO
  442 F.2d 244· 8th Cir.· 1970-11-25 ·cited 15×
  The court ordered the parties to submit the dispute regarding the union's right to instruct members to honor a sister union's picket lines to the System Adjustment Board for prompt resolution.
• Packard Instrument Co., Inc. v. ANS, Inc.
  416 F.2d 943· 2d Cir.· 1969-06-18 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the licensing agreement was ambiguous regarding the transferability of the patent license and that the trial court erred in refusing to consider parol evidence.
• Montgomery Pipe & Tube Co. OF Fla. v. Mann
  205 So. 2d 660· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-01-09 ·cited 15×·via Temporary Injunction
  Administrative inspections of private dwellings without a warrant violate the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.