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

• United States v. Local 30
  871 F.2d 401· 3d Cir.· 1989-03-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court had the authority under 18 U.S.C. § 1964(a) to impose a broad decree against the Union to remedy RICO violations and that the terms of the decree were not an abuse of discretion.
• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Ranbir S. Sahni
  868 F.2d 1096· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a district court erred in requiring a likelihood of asset dissipation for an asset freeze, when only a possibility is necessary if success on the merits is shown.
• Perez-Serrano v. DeLEON-Velez
  868 F.2d 30· 1st Cir.· 1989-02-22 ·cited 6×
  In a § 1983 action seeking both damages and injunctive relief, common issues of liability must first be submitted to a jury, and the district court erred by resolving liability itself.
• Gerhard Bass v. Attardi
  868 F.2d 45· 3d Cir.· 1989-02-14 ·cited 6×
  Members of a New Jersey planning board and their agents are absolutely immune from section 1983 actions in their individual capacities; however, suits against them in their official capacities are treated as suits against the board itself, which has no immunity. The court could n
• Nassau Boulevard Shell Serv. Station, Inc. v. Shell OIL Co.
  869 F.2d 23· 2d Cir.· 1989-02-10 ·cited 6×
  The court granted the emergency motion for a stay pending appeal and preliminary injunction, but cautioned against eleventh-hour motions for relief in franchise disputes.
• Blue Bell Bio-Medical v. Cin-Bad, Inc.
  864 F.2d 1253· 5th Cir.· 1989-02-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a former distributor's intent to copy a product is insufficient to establish trade dress infringement without a likelihood of consumer confusion, and that the district court did not err in finding no likelihood of confusion.
• The Video Trip Corp. v. Lightning Video, Inc.
  866 F.2d 50· 2d Cir.· 1989-01-20 ·cited 6×·via Motion For Preliminary Injunction
  The court held that a preliminary injunction was properly denied because significant contract disputes, including alleged breaches by the plaintiff, created a genuine issue of material fact regarding copyright ownership, precluding a finding of probable success on the merits.
• H & W Indus., Inc. v. Formosa Plastics Corp.
  860 F.2d 172· 5th Cir.· 1988-11-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a district court cannot dismiss claims on the merits following a preliminary injunction hearing without prior notice to the parties, and that Mississippi's UCC statute of frauds, not its general statute of frauds, governs contracts for the sale of goods.
• Hudson Nat'l Bank v. Shapiro
  695 F. Supp. 544· S.D. Fla.· 1988-09-14 ·cited 6×
  The court granted a preliminary injunction against certain bank accounts believed to hold proceeds of a fraudulent credit card scheme, but denied it for another account where the plaintiff failed to establish a clear legal right.
• Flowers Indus. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n
  849 F.2d 551· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Flowers failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and that the case was not ripe for judicial review because the FTC had not yet initiated enforcement proceedings.
• ENG v. Smith
  849 F.2d 80· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction requiring the provision of mental health services, finding a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
• The Republic OF the Philippines v. NEW York Land Co.
  852 F.2d 33· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in appointing a special property advisor and issuing an injunction against expenditures without court approval, as these measures were necessary to preserve the properties pending determination of ownership.
• Sebastian Int'l, Inc. v. Consumer Contacts (PTY) Ltd.
  847 F.2d 1093· 3d Cir.· 1988-05-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the first sale doctrine bars a copyright infringement claim for unauthorized importation of goods that the copyright owner manufactured and sold domestically.
• Colt Indus. Inc. v. Fidelco Pump & Compressor Corp. & Fidelco Equip. Corp.
  844 F.2d 117· 3d Cir.· 1988-04-08 ·cited 6×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court held that the distributorship agreement was a franchise under the New Jersey Franchise Practices Act because it granted a license to use a trade name and involved a community of interest.
• CBS Inc. v. Smith
  681 F. Supp. 794· S.D. Fla.· 1988-04-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Florida Statute § 102.031(3)(a) impermissibly restricts the First Amendment rights of the media to gather and report information by prohibiting solicitation of opinions within 150 feet of polling places.
• Fla. Comm. for Liab. Reform v. McMillan
  682 F. Supp. 1536· M.D. Fla.· 1988-02-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Florida Statute § 102.031(3) is unconstitutionally overbroad and granted a preliminary injunction against its enforcement.
• State OF Tex. v. United States
  837 F.2d 184· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that it lacked authority to enjoin state court proceedings because the state action did not threaten the federal court's jurisdiction over the administrative appeal.
• Forry, Inc. v. Neundorfer, Inc.
  837 F.2d 259· 6th Cir.· 1988-01-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction was properly granted because the plaintiff demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits and the defendants failed to rebut the presumption of irreparable harm.
• Pub. Serv. Co. OF NEW Hampshire v. Town OF W. Newbury
  835 F.2d 380· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the company failed to demonstrate a likelihood of irreparable harm or success on the merits, and therefore the denial of a preliminary injunction was not an abuse of discretion.
• Francine Marxe v. C.W. Jackson
  833 F.2d 1121· 3d Cir.· 1987-11-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while a plaintiff's likelihood of success on the merits was supported by the record, the district court erred in finding irreparable harm to the plaintiff without sufficient affirmative evidence, thus reversing the preliminary injunction.
• Manning v. Energy Conversion Devices, Inc.
  833 F.2d 1096· 2d Cir.· 1987-11-20 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's order compelling arbitration, finding that the appellants failed to present an adequate basis to oppose or vacate the order despite procedural irregularities.
• UST, Inc. v. The United States
  831 F.2d 1028· Fed. Cir.· 1987-10-15 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that the appellants failed to demonstrate irreparable injury from being required to answer questionnaires.
• Stiller v. Mariner CAY Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc.
  513 So. 2d 798· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-10-14 ·cited 6×·via Temporary Injunction
• Busboom Grain Co., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n
  830 F.2d 74· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-02 ·cited 6×
  A stay pending judicial review of an ICC abandonment order is not essential to preserve shippers' ability to seek relief, as a favorable court decision can restore the status quo.
• Vargas-Figueroa v. Saldana
  826 F.2d 160· 1st Cir.· 1987-08-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits and the harm to the university outweighed the harm to the plaintiff.
• Chemlawn Servs. Corp. & CL Licensing Corp. v. GNC Pumps, Inc.
  823 F.2d 515· Fed. Cir.· 1987-07-02 ·cited 6×
  The court reversed the preliminary injunction because the district court failed to timely issue findings of fact and conclusions of law and attempted to do so after losing jurisdiction.
• AMR Servs. Corp. (AMR) v. Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters ("IBT")
  821 F.2d 162· 2d Cir.· 1987-06-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the evidence supported the finding that the picketing was not a dispute over representation under the Railway Labor Act.
• Recon/Optical, Inc. v. Gov't OF Israel
  816 F.2d 854· 2d Cir.· 1987-04-17 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that the appellant had no chance of success on the merits in enjoining a letter of credit drawdown.
• Certified Grocers OF Ill., Inc. v. Produce
  816 F.2d 329· 7th Cir.· 1987-04-10 ·cited 6×
  The appeal from the preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot because the injunction expired by its own terms and the subsequent permanent injunction was not timely appealed.
• Hansen v. Guyette
  814 F.2d 547· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a union's trusteeship imposed for correcting a local union's violation of the international constitution and federal labor laws was validly imposed and enforceable by injunction.
• Kareem Faheem-El v. Klincar
  814 F.2d 461· 7th Cir.· 1987-03-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Illinois' blanket denial of bail to arrested parole violators pending their final revocation hearing likely violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Maybelline Co. v. Noxell Corp.
  813 F.2d 901· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-10 ·cited 6×
  Venue is improper in the Eastern District of Arkansas because the defendants were not 'doing business' there under the commerce clause standard, nor did the claim arise there.
• Serpas v. Schmidt
  808 F.2d 601· 7th Cir.· 1986-12-19 ·cited 6×
  The court should abstain from deciding the constitutional issue to allow Illinois courts to interpret the state statute, which could resolve the case without constitutional adjudication.
• Hale v. Dep't OF Energy
  806 F.2d 910· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the Mercury Road stretch within the NTS is a nonpublic forum, and the DOE's regulations were reasonable and viewpoint-neutral.
• Beermart, Inc. v. The Stroh Brewery Co.
  804 F.2d 409· 7th Cir.· 1986-10-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a wholesale beer distributor's intentional sale of overage beer, with fraudulent repackaging and false dating, constituted a breach of the distribution agreement justifying immediate termination, and that such conduct barred the distributor from seeking equita
• Benkendorf v. Vill. OF Hazel Crest
  804 F.2d 99· 7th Cir.· 1986-10-27 ·cited 6×
  The appeal of the denial of a preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot because the challenged ordinance was amended during the pendency of the appeal.
• Chalfy v. Marrone
  804 F.2d 20· 2d Cir.· 1986-10-23 ·cited 6×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court held that the appellants' constitutional claims regarding TLC's administration of limousine licensing requirements were without merit and affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment.
• Asher B. Edelman v. Fruehauf Corp.
  798 F.2d 882· 6th Cir.· 1986-08-08 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's preliminary injunction, modifying it to ensure equal treatment of all bidders and requiring specific disclosures.
• Refac Int'l, Ltd. v. IBM
  798 F.2d 459· Fed. Cir.· 1986-07-31 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the appeal from a non-final order but vacated the award of attorney fees against the appellant.
• Comm. OF Cent. Am. Refugees ("Comite De Refugiados Centro-Americanos" or "Crece") v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  795 F.2d 1434· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the transfer of unrepresented aliens to detention facilities outside the San Francisco District does not, standing alone, constitute a deprivation of statutory privilege or due process rights, and thus does not warrant judicial intrusion into the Attorney Gene
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dane Cnty. Dairy
  795 F.2d 1313· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-09 ·cited 6×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the respondents failed to show good cause for their untimely answer and that the Board's finding of alter ego status was supported by substantial evidence.
• Fauconniere Mfg. Corp. v. Secretary OF Defense
  794 F.2d 350· 8th Cir.· 1986-06-24 ·cited 6×
  The appeal from the preliminary injunction is dismissed as moot because the underlying contract has been fully performed, rendering the injunction's purpose unachievable.
• Horgan v. MacMillan, Inc.
  789 F.2d 157· 2d Cir.· 1986-04-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court applied the wrong legal standard for determining copyright infringement by photographs of choreography, and remanded for reconsideration.
• Satellite Dev. Corp. v. Tortoise Island Homeowner's Ass'n, Inc.
  487 So. 2d 1157· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-04-24 ·cited 6×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court reversed a temporary injunction against a developer's use of a private road, holding that the developer's platted easement for ingress and egress was valid and the homeowner's association failed to establish the prerequisites for injunctive relief.
• United States v. Akers
  785 F.2d 814· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the farmer's extensive wetland alteration activities, aimed at converting them to farmland, were not exempt from Clean Water Act permit requirements and affirmed the preliminary injunction.
• Mantek Div. OF NCH Corp. v. Share Corp.
  780 F.2d 702· 7th Cir.· 1986-01-07 ·cited 6×
  The district court did not err in excluding evidence of commercial bribery as a defense to a preliminary injunction.
• The Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Coston
  773 F.2d 1513· 9th Cir.· 1985-10-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion or rely on an erroneous legal premise in denying the preliminary injunction, as the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits of their NEPA and APA claims.
• U.S. Floral Corp. v. Salazar
  475 So. 2d 1305· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-09-24 ·cited 6×·via Temporary Injunction
• Outboard Marine Corp. v. Thomas
  773 F.2d 883· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the EPA lacked statutory authority under CERCLA to obtain an administrative warrant for preliminary design and surveying activities on private property when no emergency existed.
• Glasstech, Inc. v. AB Kyro OY
  769 F.2d 1574· Fed. Cir.· 1985-08-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the transfer of a case for multidistrict litigation proceedings divests the transferor court of jurisdiction, rendering its subsequent orders void and precluding appellate review.