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

• 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.
• Katz v. McAULAY
  438 F.2d 1058· 2d Cir.· 1971-02-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the denial of a preliminary injunction was not an abuse of discretion because the Board of Regents' rule prohibiting student solicitation of funds was a reasonable regulation aimed at preventing harm to the school's educational mission.
• Winfield v. Major John C. Riebel
  438 F.2d 271· 6th Cir.· 1970-12-24 ·cited 10×·via Motion For Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that the appellant was not entitled to a I-S deferment and that the local board did not abuse its discretion in denying his hardship classification claim.
• Rosenblatt v. Nw. Airlines, Inc.
  435 F.2d 1121· 2d Cir.· 1970-12-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the proxy statement, while not perfect, contained sufficient information to alert minority stockholders to the controlling shareholder's interest in the merger, and thus did not warrant an injunction.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Charles Plohn & Co.
  433 F.2d 376· 2d Cir.· 1970-10-20 ·cited 10×
  The court should reverse the order appointing a receiver due to lack of a fair hearing and due deliberation, despite potential violations.
• Stella v. Selective Serv. Sys. OF the United States OF Am.
  427 F.2d 887· 2d Cir.· 1970-06-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied jurisdiction because the registrant's induction order was not a 'blatantly lawless' action or a 'clear departure from its statutory mandate'.
• Royal Indus. v. ST. Regis Paper Co.
  420 F.2d 449· 9th Cir.· 1969-12-22 ·cited 10×
  Summary judgment for the defendant was appropriate because the plaintiff could not unilaterally terminate the licensing agreement without the consent of its co-licensor, Plas-Ties, which was a separate legal entity.
• Textile & Apparel Grp. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  410 F.2d 1052· D.C. Cir.· 1969-03-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Federal Trade Commission's Rule 36, which allowed for pre-release detention and testing of imported wool products, was not authorized by the Wool Act of 1939.
• Garlock, Inc. v. United Seal Inc.
  404 F.2d 256· 6th Cir.· 1968-12-20 ·cited 10×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a preliminary injunction.
• Protestants & Other Americans United for Separation of Church & State v. Watson
  407 F.2d 1264· D.C. Cir.· 1968-11-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that at least two appellants, as taxpayers, possess the requisite standing to challenge federal expenditures for a commemorative stamp alleged to violate the Establishment Clause.
• ST. Sophia Greek Orthodox Community v. Vamvaks
  213 So. 2d 313· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-08-13 ·cited 10×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the notice given for the temporary injunction was adequate and the relief granted was temporary in nature, complying with procedural rules. The court also held that denying a jury trial in an equitable case was within the lower court's discretion.
• 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×·via Temporary Injunction
  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.
• Symington Wayne Corp. v. Dresser Indus., Inc.
  383 F.2d 840· 2d Cir.· 1967-07-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm, and the balance of hardships weighed against granting a preliminary injunction.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Inv. Corp. OF Am.
  369 F.2d 383· 7th Cir.· 1966-11-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the district court's order denying a motion to construe a preliminary injunction, as it was neither a final decision nor an appealable interlocutory order.
• Bieski v. E. Auto. Forwarding Co., Inc.
  354 F.2d 414· 3d Cir.· 1965-12-29 ·cited 10×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court held that the lower court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because there was no imminent threat of irreparable harm.
• Nat'l Chemsearch Corp. of N.Y., Inc. v. Bogatin
  349 F.2d 363· 3d Cir.· 1965-07-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court exceeded its discretion by granting a preliminary injunction for a fixed one-year period.
• Hulburt OIL & Grease Co. v. Hulburt OIL & Grease Co.
  346 F.2d 260· 7th Cir.· 1965-06-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo pending final determination of the action.
• Murphy v. Wash. Am. League Base Ball Club, Inc.
  324 F.2d 394· D.C. Cir.· 1963-07-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the denial of a preliminary injunction against salary increases was not an abuse of discretion, and that the corporation's payment of legal fees for officers charged with misconduct requires separate representation.
• J. M. Fields OF Anderson, Inc. v. The Kroger Co.
  310 F.2d 562· 5th Cir.· 1962-11-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction because the evidence supported findings of notice and irreparable injury.
• Nelson v. The Honorable H. H. Grooms
  307 F.2d 76· 5th Cir.· 1962-08-17 ·cited 10×
  The court implies that the district court has a duty to act promptly on desegregation cases, even if novel aspects are involved.
• B. W. Photo Utils. v. Republic Molding Corp.
  280 F.2d 806· 9th Cir.· 1960-07-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction, as there was credible evidence supporting the appellee's request for relief pending trial.
• Murray Ferguson Under Chapter X Proceeding for Equitable Plan Co. v. Bucks Cnty. Farms, Inc.
  280 F.2d 739· 3d Cir.· 1960-07-07 ·cited 10×·via Application For Preliminary Injunction
  A Chapter X trustee seeking an injunction in a plenary action must comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c) by posting security.
• Crane Co. v. Briggs Mfg. Co.
  280 F.2d 747· 6th Cir.· 1960-06-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was properly granted because the equities favored the plaintiff, and the potential harm to the plaintiff from the defendant gaining board control outweighed any harm to the defendant from the injunction.
• Solex Labs., Inc. v. Plastic Contact Lens Co.
  268 F.2d 637· 7th Cir.· 1959-06-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction against the patent owner for misrepresenting patent rights and harassing customers, nor in setting the bond amount.
• Duckworth v. James
  267 F.2d 224· 4th Cir.· 1959-05-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a city council's attempt to close public schools by withholding funds, under the guise of appropriation control, constituted state action violating constitutional rights and was subject to federal injunction.
• Schlosser v. Commonwealth Edison Co.
  250 F.2d 478· 7th Cir.· 1958-01-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction requiring payment of disputed funds before a final determination of the merits is generally not warranted, especially when the underlying claim is controverted.
• Bechik Prods., Inc. v. Flexible Prods., Inc.
  225 F.2d 603· 2d Cir.· 1955-08-09 ·cited 10×·via Temporary Injunction
  An injunction restraining the institution of suits against a patent infringer's customers may issue only on condition that the infringer furnish a bond to cover any pecuniary award to the patentee.
• Textag Co., Inc. v. Hayslip
  192 F.2d 435· 5th Cir.· 1951-11-20 ·cited 10×·via Temporary Injunction
  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.
• Woods v. Hillcrest Terrace Corp.
  170 F.2d 980· 8th Cir.· 1948-12-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the District Court erred in dismissing the complaint without allowing evidence or amendment, and in refusing a preliminary injunction.
• 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.
• Betmar Hats, Inc. v. Young Am. Hats, Inc.
  116 F.2d 956· 2d Cir.· 1941-01-22 ·cited 10×·via Injunction Pendente Lite
  The court held that persistent threats to customers regarding patent infringement, unsupported by a lawsuit to validate the patent, are grounds for an injunction.
• Nelson v. State
  84 Fla. 631· Fla.· 1922-12-01 ·cited 10×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld an injunction prohibiting Percy Nelson from operating a rooming house and cold drink stand that allegedly served as a front for prostitution and lewdness. The court affirmed that the state has authority to suppress public evils through injunctive
• Richardson v. Kittlewell
  45 Fla. 551· Fla.· 1903-01-01 ·cited 10×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court reviewed a lower court's decision to dissolve a temporary injunction and dismiss a married woman's bill claiming separate statutory property. While the dissolution of the injunction was affirmed, the dismissal of the bill was reversed.
• The Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Gip Gibson and George Egbert
  43 Fla. 315· Fla.· 1901-06-01 ·cited 10×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court considered whether a railroad company was entitled to an injunction for future trespasses and damages from past logging. The court found the railroad was entitled to an injunction for future trespasses but not for past damages due to insufficient allegations of ownershi
• Wood v. Fla. Dep't of Educ.
  142 F.4th 1286· 11th Cir.· 2025-07-02 ·cited 9×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  Katie Wood, a transgender public school teacher in Florida, challenged a state law prohibiting her from using the honorific "Ms." and feminine pronouns in classroom interactions with students, claiming the restriction violated her First Amendment free speech rights. The Eleventh
• Allied Universal Corp. v. Given
  223 So. 3d 1040· Fla. 3d DCA· 2017-03-15 ·cited 9×·via Motion For Preliminary Injunction
  Allied Universal Corporation appealed the denial of its motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to enforce a non-compete agreement against former employee Jeffrey Given. The appellate court reversed, holding that Given failed to rebut the statutory presumption of irreparable
• Infinity Home Care, L.L.C. v. Amedisys Holding, LLC
  180 So. 3d 1060· Fla. 4th DCA· 2015-11-18 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  Infinity Home Care and employee Sylvie Forjet appealed a temporary injunction enforcing non-compete and non-solicitation covenants in an employment contract. The Fourth District held that referral sources for home health services constitute a protectable legitimate business inter
• Trans Health Mgmt. Inc. v. Nunziata
  159 So. 3d 850· Fla. 2d DCA· 2014-12-19 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  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
• McKEEGAN v. Ernst
  84 So. 3d 1229· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-04-11 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  Rita McKeegan appealed an ex parte temporary injunction granted against her by the trial court. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, finding the injunction facially deficient because it lacked sufficient factual findings supporting each prong of the four-part injunction
• Kountze v. Kountze
  20 So. 3d 428· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-10-16 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  Elizabeth Kountze and Charles Denman Kountze appealed a trial court order finding jurisdiction over them and requiring maintenance of the status quo of trust assets claimed by the estate's personal representative. The appellate court reversed and remanded because the trial court
• Jouvence Ctr. FOR Advanced Health, LLC v. Jouvence Rejuvenation Ctrs., LLC
  14 So. 3d 1097· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-06-10 ·cited 9×·via Preliminary Injunction Requirements
  A Florida appellate court reversed a preliminary injunction granted to JRC against JCAH and the Haskins, finding that the trial court failed to make the required factual findings and failed to establish JRC's likelihood of success on the merits regarding whether the patient files
• USI Ins. Servs. OF Fla. Inc. v. Pettineo
  987 So. 2d 763· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-07-16 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  USI Insurance Services appeals the denial of a temporary injunction to enforce a non-compete agreement against the seller of an insurance agency it purchased. The court reversed, finding the trial court applied an outdated version of Florida's restrictive covenant statute that im
• Lewis v. Sunbelt Rentals, Inc.
  949 So. 2d 1114· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-02-16 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting a temporary injunction without notice to the opposing party, as the motion and order failed to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610.
• Florida Democratic Party v. Hood
  342 F. Supp. 2d 1073· N.D. Fla.· 2004-10-21 ·cited 9×
  Federal law mandates allowing voters to cast provisional ballots even if at the wrong polling place, but does not require counting such ballots if cast at the incorrect precinct.
• Am. II Elecs., Inc. v. Smith
  830 So. 2d 906· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-11-20 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  America II Electronics sought a temporary injunction against its former employee Joel Smith to enforce a non-compete agreement. The circuit court denied relief based on an outdated legal standard, but the appellate court reversed, holding that under the applicable 1996 statute, v
• Jacquelyn Pinder v. Pinder
  817 So. 2d 1104· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-06-14 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  In the second appeal of this dissolution of marriage case, the former wife challenged the trial court's interpretation of appellate instructions regarding lump sum alimony and a temporary restraining order on her out-of-state property. The appellate court held it lacked jurisdict
• LEE Cnty. v. S. Fla. Water Mgmt. Dist.
  805 So. 2d 893· Fla. 2d DCA· 2001-10-12 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  Lee County challenged the South Florida Water Management District's emergency plan to discharge large volumes of fresh water from Lake Okeechobee into the Caloosahatchee River estuary to save the lake's dying fish population. The court affirmed the denial of the county's petition
• Int'l Vill. Ass'n, Inc. v. Stefan Schaaffee and Marlo Jones
  786 So. 2d 656· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-06-13 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  A temporary injunction cannot stand alone as an independent lawsuit without a request for permanent relief.
• Maurelle S. AIN v. AIN
  778 So. 2d 1029· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-01-24 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court affirmed a temporary injunction prohibiting the mother from moving with her children, finding no reversible error.
• Jones v. Jones
  761 So. 2d 478· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-06-30 ·cited 9×·via Temporary Injunction
  Roy Jones appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to dissolve a temporary injunction that prevented him from removing his children from his former wife's custody pending resolution of a custody modification motion. The appellate court reversed, finding the temporary injun