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

• Int'l Bhd. OF Boilermakers v. Local Lodge D129 OF the Cement
  910 F.2d 1056· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-09 ·cited 4×
  A labor union's trusteeship imposed on a local lodge is invalid if the local lodge has fewer than ten members at the time of imposition, as it is automatically disbanded and no longer a subordinate body.
• Black Fire Fighters Ass'n OF Dallas v. City OF Dallas
  905 F.2d 63· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-21 ·cited 4×
• Ill. Tool Works, Inc. v. Grip-Pak, Inc.
  906 F.2d 679· Fed. Cir.· 1990-06-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the patent holder failed to sufficiently demonstrate the necessary equitable factors.
• Roho v. Marquis
  902 F.2d 356· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's actions in assembling patented wheelchair cushions into a mattress and relabeling it did not constitute reverse palming off under the Lanham Act because a new product was created.
• DFW Metro Line Servs. v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co.
  901 F.2d 1267· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-29 ·cited 4×·via Preliminary Injunction Requirements
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of irreparable injury, as money damages would be adequate compensation.
• Markham v. Int'l Ass'n OF Bridge
  901 F.2d 1022· 11th Cir.· 1990-05-22 ·cited 4×
  A preliminary injunction that merely preserves the status quo pending a hearing does not constitute prevailing party status sufficient to justify an award of attorney's fees.
• Pinch-A-Penny OF Pinellas Cnty., Inc. v. Chango
  557 So. 2d 940· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-03-09 ·cited 4×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  Pinch-A-Penny appeals the trial court's denial of a temporary injunction to enforce noncompetition agreements against former employees who went to work for a competitor. The appellate court reversed, holding that Pinch-A-Penny established all elements for a preliminary injunction
• Weitzman v. Stein
  897 F.2d 653· 2d Cir.· 1990-03-01 ·cited 4×
  An injunction freezing a party's assets was improperly entered because it lacked notice to the party and the court failed to make required findings of fact and conclusions of law, and because personal jurisdiction had not been sufficiently established.
• Concept, Inc. v. Thermotemp, Inc.
  553 So. 2d 1325· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-12-13 ·cited 4×·via Temporary Injunction
  Concept, Inc. appeals a temporary injunction blocking it from manufacturing a thermal therapy machine similar to Thermotemp's. The court affirms the injunction, holding that Concept breached a written confidential disclosure agreement by using Thermotemp's non-public product impr
• Moraine Indus. Supply, Inc. v. Sterling Rubber Prods. Co.
  891 F.2d 133· 6th Cir.· 1989-12-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction enforcing noncompetition agreements cannot extend beyond the expiration date of those agreements.
• The Rathmann Grp. v. Tanenbaum
  889 F.2d 787· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by failing to adequately consider the amount of security required for a preliminary injunction and erred by issuing a preliminary injunction that effectively granted all relief sought without proper notice or considerat
• Higgs v. Bland
  888 F.2d 443· 6th Cir.· 1989-10-27 ·cited 4×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction and attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, but vacated the denial of attorney fees under the consent decree.
• Concerned Women FOR Am., Inc. v. Lafayette Cnty. & Oxford Pub. Library
  883 F.2d 32· 5th Cir.· 1989-09-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the library, by allowing diverse community groups to use its auditorium, created a public forum, and therefore could not exclude CWA based on the religious content of its meetings.
• S. Fred Everett, M.D. v. Franciscan Sisters Healthcare, Inc.
  882 F.2d 1383· 8th Cir.· 1989-08-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the parent corporation was improperly sued, but remanded to allow the plaintiff to amend the complaint to add the correct defendant, St. Ansgar's Hospital.
• Seneca-Cayuga Tribe OF Oklahoma v. State OF Okla. ex rel. David L. Thompson
  874 F.2d 709· 10th Cir.· 1989-05-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court was not required to abstain from exercising its jurisdiction and properly issued a preliminary injunction against the state's interference with tribal bingo operations.
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. World Wide Factors, Ltd.
  882 F.2d 344· 9th Cir.· 1989-04-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the asset freeze and appointment of a special master were proper, the specific hourly rate limitations for attorney fees were arbitrary and required reconsideration.
• The Long Island R.R. Co. v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists
  874 F.2d 901· 2d Cir.· 1989-04-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that sympathy strikes by railroad employees, in response to a strike by another union against a different employer, are subject to the Railway Labor Act's dispute resolution procedures and can be enjoined pending arbitration.
• Moma Louise Armstrong v. T.O. Adams
  869 F.2d 410· 8th Cir.· 1989-03-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the former election officials lacked standing to appeal the settlement because they failed to demonstrate plain legal prejudice from their dismissal and the district court had jurisdiction to approve the settlement.
• S.C. Dep't OF Wildlife & Marine Res. v. Marsh
  866 F.2d 97· 4th Cir.· 1989-01-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the Corps' failure to adequately consider environmental risks in its EIS warranted an injunction against operation of pumped storage facilities, enjoining their installation was overly broad as installation itself caused no environmental harm.
• Sims Snowboards, Inc. v. Craig Kelly & the Burton Corp.
  863 F.2d 643· 9th Cir.· 1988-12-06 ·cited 4×
  A federal court in a diversity case must apply state law, including anti-injunction statutes, if that law is outcome-determinative, even if federal equitable powers might otherwise permit an injunction.
• Associated Bus. Tel. Sys. Corp. v. Greater Cap. Corp.
  861 F.2d 793· 3d Cir.· 1988-11-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the order directing repossession of the telephone system was a reviewable preliminary injunction, but the order directing payment of funds was not appealable. The denial of the motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction over the corporate defendant wa
• RGI, Inc. v. Tucker & Assocs., Inc.
  858 F.2d 227· 5th Cir.· 1988-10-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a preliminary injunction is permissible to maintain the status quo pending arbitration when the contract itself contemplates such relief.
• Jean v. Nelson
  854 F.2d 405· 11th Cir.· 1988-09-02 ·cited 4×
  The continued enforcement of the district court's injunction violates this court's previous mandate and must be terminated.
• Ringling BROS.-BARNUM & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. Celozzi-Ettelson Chevrolet, Inc.
  855 F.2d 480· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Illinois Anti-Dilution Act is not preempted by federal trademark law and that the defendant's use of a similar slogan diluted the plaintiff's famous mark, justifying a preliminary injunction.
• Glover v. Johnson
  855 F.2d 277· 6th Cir.· 1988-08-22 ·cited 4×
  The court's reference to per capita allocation of costs should not be overread but considered in context.
• Conecuh-Monroe Cmty. Action Agency v. Bowen
  852 F.2d 581· D.C. Cir.· 1988-07-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the transfer of a county from one Community Action Agency (CAA) to another, where the county was not initially served by a federally funded CAA, does not constitute a 'termination' triggering the requirement for direct federal funding.
• Fleet Aerospace Corp. v. Holderman
  848 F.2d 720· 6th Cir.· 1988-06-06 ·cited 4×
  The court should find the Ohio Act preempted by the Williams Act and in violation of the Commerce Clause.
• Half Moon BAY Fishermans' Mktg. Ass'n v. Carlucci
  847 F.2d 1389· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, as the defendants had minimally complied with NEPA and MPRSA requirements for the initial dredging phase.
• United States v. BNS Inc.
  848 F.2d 945· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court held that the district court had authority to issue a preliminary injunction under the All Writs Act to preserve its jurisdiction under the APPA, and modified the injunction by appointing an independent trustee.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Alton E. Jones
  846 F.2d 221· 4th Cir.· 1988-05-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's failure to set forth findings of fact and conclusions of law for its rulings on preliminary injunctions constituted reversible error, requiring remand.
• Hitachi Zosen Clearing, Inc. v. Tek-Matik, Inc.
  846 F.2d 27· 6th Cir.· 1988-05-04 ·cited 4×
  An order requiring the posting of security as a condition to granting a preliminary injunction is not an immediately appealable interlocutory order under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) nor under the collateral order doctrine.
• Merrill Lynch v. Dutton
  844 F.2d 726· 10th Cir.· 1988-04-13 ·cited 4×
  A preliminary injunction preserving the status quo until an arbitration panel takes jurisdiction does not violate the Federal Arbitration Act, but an open-ended injunction is improper.
• Dist. 29 v. The NEW River Co.
  842 F.2d 734· 4th Cir.· 1988-03-24 ·cited 4×·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court held that the employees' execution of broad "Receipt and Release" documents in settlement of a grievance, in exchange for substantial lump sum payments, constituted a knowing and voluntary waiver of all claims against the employer, including any claim for health benefit
• Paris v. Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  843 F.2d 561· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction, as the legislative intent underlying public housing provisions forbids skipping over families because they are too poor.
• In re Shearn Moody, Jr. v. Shearn Moody, Jr.
  837 F.2d 719· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to order a trustee to provide advance notice of spendthrift trust distributions to a bankruptcy trustee, even though the distributions themselves were not property of the bankruptcy estate.
• Quinn v. The State OF Mo.
  839 F.2d 425· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a temporary restraining order exceeding ten days, with the practical effect of a preliminary injunction, is appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), and affirmed the TRO as modified.
• Dederich Corp. v. Eurozyme S.N.C.
  839 F.2d 373· 7th Cir.· 1988-02-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by applying an incorrect legal standard to determine if a dealership existed under the Wisconsin Fair Dealership Law.
• Sharp Corp. v. The United States
  837 F.2d 1058· Fed. Cir.· 1988-01-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the lower court erred in granting preliminary injunctions because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate irreparable injury from complying with administrative review directives.
• The Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co. v. Oberly
  837 F.2d 108· 3d Cir.· 1988-01-08 ·cited 4×
  Delaware's noise control statute and regulations are not facially preempted by the federal Noise Control Act because the federal law only preempts state standards when identical federal regulations exist, and EPA has not issued such regulations for refrigerator cars or property l
• Derks v. Dugger
  835 F.2d 778· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's premature notice of appeal was effective due to unique circumstances where the district court misled him into believing it was valid.
• Joint Bd. OF Control OF the Flathead v. United States
  832 F.2d 1127· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because it failed to consider the potentially superior priority of the Tribes' fishing rights, which predated irrigation rights.
• Newmont Mining Corp. v. Pickens
  831 F.2d 1448· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the tender offer's disclosure of financing was insufficient under the Williams Act and SEC regulations, as it failed to provide specific details about borrowed funds.
• Baker's AID v. Hussmann Foodservice Co. & Hussmann Corp.
  830 F.2d 13· 1st Cir.· 1987-10-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to make a sufficient showing of irreparable harm, despite a likelihood of success on the merits.
• H & S Plumbing Supplies, Inc. v. Bancamerica Commercial Corp.
  830 F.2d 4· 2d Cir.· 1987-09-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the order denying reargument of a motion to vacate a notice of pendency is not appealable as a collateral order or a preliminary injunction.
• Conservatory-City OF Refuge, Inc. v. Kinney
  514 So. 2d 377· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-09-04 ·cited 4×·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the trial court erred in applying the Marketable Record Title Act and that the appellant's argument regarding void conveyances was premature. The temporary injunction was affirmed for most of the property but quashed as to the 'house area'.
• United States v. Torres
  826 F.2d 151· 1st Cir.· 1987-08-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Clean Water Act applies in Puerto Rico and that the appellant failed to preserve his constitutional takings claim.
• Christos N. Kritikos & E. Shipping Co. v. Palmer Johnson, Inc.
  821 F.2d 418· 7th Cir.· 1987-06-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the trial court improperly relied on settlement letters to find the plaintiff responsible for delays, other evidence supported that finding, but the trial court erred in denying the plaintiff's warranty claim after the defendant sought contract enforceme
• Elsinore Shore Assocs. v. Local 54
  820 F.2d 62· 3d Cir.· 1987-05-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a Boys Markets injunction against a strike is improper when the underlying dispute is a non-arbitrable wage negotiation failure, not a contract interpretation issue.
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Am. Nat'l Cellular, Inc.
  810 F.2d 1511· 9th Cir.· 1987-02-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Federal Trade Commission's enforcement authority under the Federal Trade Commission Act is constitutional, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction.
• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Blain
  808 F.2d 395· 5th Cir.· 1987-01-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that consent decrees are binding and cannot be unilaterally revoked, and that the appellants violated the terms of the injunction by improperly using trust funds.