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
-
759 F.2d 1253·
6th Cir.·
1985-04-25
·cited 3×
The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of its Lanham Act claim.
-
452 So. 2d 973·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1984-06-13
·cited 3×
Sun Crete appealed a preliminary injunction granted to protect Sundeck's Sundek pool deck coating process and trade secrets. The court affirmed the injunction, holding that Sundek's three-step application process, despite using commercially available materials, constitutes a prot
-
The court held that a temporary restraining order in a divorce action abates upon the death of a party, and therefore, a beneficiary change made by the insured prior to his death, even after the order, was valid.
-
700 F.2d 1067·
6th Cir.·
1983-02-25
·cited 3×
The court held that res judicata and collateral estoppel did not bar Anchor's claim for the period after the first show cause hearing, and that the Union's counterclaim for attorney fees was not barred by Alyeska. The court also affirmed the denial of Anchor's discovery extension
-
549 F. Supp. 135·
S.D. Fla.·
1982-09-23
·cited 3×
The court dismissed the action without prejudice, finding it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and that plaintiffs failed to meet the criteria for a preliminary injunction.
-
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate standing, irreparable harm, or a likelihood of success on the merits, thus denying their motion for a preliminary injunction.
-
219 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 40·
S.D. Fla.·
1982-03-23
·cited 3×
-
The court affirmed a temporary injunction restraining interference with appellee's laundry operations but reversed the portion requiring a compulsory cross-claim as overly broad and contrary to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.170(g).
-
628 F.2d 474·
5th Cir.·
1980-10-22
·cited 3×
The court held that a district court that defers merits review pending administrative proceedings should dismiss the action unless the plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm from dismissal.
-
586 F.2d 1·
6th Cir.·
1978-08-10
·cited 3×
The court held that the notice of reduction of optional Medicaid benefits complied with federal regulations and that no hearing was required for such reductions based on state law or policy.
-
A circuit court has jurisdiction to issue an injunction restraining a public officer from harassing citizens by unauthorized actions under color of office, even if the ruling is later found to be erroneous.
-
The Florida Supreme Court recalled its prior mandate to clarify its judgment regarding an injunction against dry cleaning businesses. The court affirmed the injunction's requirement for businesses to comply with board orders and pay license fees, but also allowed businesses to ch
-
This case involves a dispute over restrictive covenants on land. The court previously denied a temporary injunction due to delay and the availability of a legal remedy. Subsequently, the plaintiff sued for damages for breach of covenants, but the trial court sustained a demurrer,
-
A temporary injunction was improper because the movant failed to establish irreparable harm lacking an adequate legal remedy, as the defendant had available defenses in pending lawsuits and adequate remedies at law including money damages for employment termination and other clai
-
A trial court abuses its discretion by denying a motion to continue a permanent injunction hearing when the movant had preplanned international travel, received only eight days' notice, filed the continuance motion promptly, and the opposing party would not be prejudiced by the d
-
95 F.4th 1346·
11th Cir.·
2024-03-13
·cited 2×
The withdrawal of allegedly unlawful agency notices by the Department of Veterans Affairs rendered the grantee's claims moot, depriving the court of jurisdiction to grant meaningful relief.
-
The appellate court affirmed a trial court's temporary injunction against the appellant. The appellant argued the trial court's factual findings were inaccurate but failed to provide a transcript of the hearing, preventing review.
-
2020 WL 6541994·
S.D. Fla.·
2023-01-31
·cited 2×
The Court denied Petitioner's motion for release because the preliminary injunction he relied upon was vacated.
-
58 F.4th 1322·
11th Cir.·
2023-01-27
·cited 2×
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of the motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction, holding that the FTC could rely on § 19 of the FTC Act for asset freezes and receiverships, even after the Supreme Court limited § 13(b).
-
The appellate court reversed a trial court's denial of a motion to dissolve a temporary injunction. The court found the injunction was improperly granted because the moving party failed to establish the necessary elements and the order did not comply with procedural rules regardi
-
2022 WL 2824907·
S.D. Fla.·
2022-08-18
·cited 2×
The court granted plaintiffs' motion to lift the stay and enter a preliminary injunction, enjoining defendants from enforcing specific ordinances.
-
546 F. Supp. 3d 1082·
N.D. Fla.·
2022-08-18
·cited 2×
Honeyfund.com and other employers and diversity consultants challenged Florida's Individual Freedom Act, which prohibits employers from endorsing eight specified concepts related to race, sex, and national origin during mandatory employee activities, as a violation of the First A
-
The appellate court reversed a trial court's denial of a temporary injunction, finding that the medical practice, Joseph Spine, P.A., was entitled to a presumption of irreparable harm due to a former physician's (Dr. Moulton) violation of restrictive covenants in his employment a
-
The appellate court reversed a lower court's denial of a temporary injunction against Alachua County's mask mandate. The court held that the mandate implicated the fundamental right to privacy under the Florida Constitution and therefore required strict scrutiny, which the lower
-
The appellate court reversed a temporary injunction because the trial court failed to make specific factual findings to support the injunction and did not hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the bond amount. The court emphasized the strict procedural requirements for tempora
-
Executive Order 20-244 does not expressly preempt local government curfews because the order's prohibition on measures that "prevent an individual from working or from operating a business" applies only to enactments that prohibit or shut down businesses altogether, not to time-o
-
306 So. 3d 1115·
Fla. 3d DCA·
2020-08-19
·cited 2×
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision to grant a preliminary injunction but reversed the decision regarding the lack of a bond. The court found that a bond is required to protect the enjoined party from damages if the injunction is later found to be wrongful.
-
Gonzalez-Barrera and Garcia appeal a permanent injunction issued against Garcia by Majorca Towers Condominium Association. The court affirmed the injunction prohibiting Garcia from residing in a separate unit from Gonzalez-Barrera without Association approval, but reversed the in
-
Florida appellate court reversed a temporary injunction granted without an evidentiary hearing, holding that trial courts must conduct an evidentiary hearing and make factual findings before granting injunctive relief.
-
An unsworn motion for injunctive relief requires an evidentiary hearing before the trial court may grant a temporary injunction, and the trial court must enter factual findings to permit meaningful appellate review.
-
The trial court abused its discretion by relying on website screenshots not introduced into evidence to extend the non-compete injunction, and even if the website existed when alleged, it did not constitute improper advertising under the agreement since it contained only biograph
-
The Secretary of State's opinion categorically barring early voting on college campuses violates the First, Fourteenth, and Twenty-Sixth Amendments by imposing significant burdens on young voters without sufficient justification.
-
A temporary injunction enforcing restrictive covenants in a physician employment agreement was properly granted where the employer demonstrated legitimate business interests in existing patients, substantial investment in developing patient goodwill in a specific geographic area,
-
The Florida Second District Court of Appeal enforced its prior mandate requiring the trial court to grant a temporary injunction prohibiting a former employee from violating a restrictive covenant. The trial court had failed to comply with the appellate court's clear instructions
-
A trial court does not abuse its discretion by enjoining an alleged continuing trespass, even if the injunction disturbs, rather than preserves, the status quo.
-
-
Betty Dowdy appealed a temporary injunction requiring her to deposit $100,000 in court proceeds from a trust property sale. The court reversed, holding that Michael Dowdy, her stepson and alleged co-trustee, had no likelihood of success on the merits because he did not become a s
-
Carla Hiles appeals a temporary injunction granted to her former employer Americare Home Therapy to enforce restrictive covenants in her employment agreement. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed in part, holding that referral sources do not constitute a legitimate busines
-
FDHS and Dr. Colina's LLC challenged a trial court's partial denial of a temporary injunction to enforce a restrictive covenant against Dr. Colina's employment with IMG, a large multi-physician medical group. The Florida appellate court reversed the trial court's refusal to enfor
-
CashCall and related entities challenged a trial court's temporary injunction freezing loan proceeds and requiring a $1 million reserve pending resolution of a Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act action. The Court reversed, holding that the Attorney General failed to establi
-
The court held that a temporary injunction order must specify the reasons for its entry and be supported by clear, definite, and unequivocally sufficient factual findings for each of the four necessary criteria.
-
Richland Towers appealed the denial of a temporary injunction to enforce restrictive covenants and confidentiality provisions in employment agreements with former employees Denton and West. The court reversed, holding that the restrictive covenants were enforceable independent co
-
The court held that a case management order broadly restricting parties' communication regarding litigation issues constitutes an injunction and an impermissible prior restraint on speech absent necessary findings.
-
William Rudge appeals a trial court order modifying a temporary injunction that allowed the City of Stuart to enter his property to abate code enforcement violations and clean up a public nuisance. The Fourth District affirms the injunction, holding that the city has a clear lega
-
29 So. 3d 401·
Fla. 3d DCA·
2010-03-03
·cited 2×
Miami-Dade police officers Avila and Perez sought injunctive relief to prevent their termination, claiming the county violated a 180-day statutory notice requirement for disciplinary action. The trial court and appellate court rejected this challenge, holding that the 180-day per
-
691 F. Supp. 2d 1327·
M.D. Fla.·
2010-03-01
·cited 2×
The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm, thus denying the motion for a preliminary injunction.
-
657 F. Supp. 2d 1331·
S.D. Fla.·
2009-09-23
·cited 2×
The court affirmed the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting summary judgment for the defendants and dismissing the plaintiff's claims.
-
54 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2340·
S.D. Fla.·
2009-08-17
·cited 2×
The court granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion for attorneys' fees and costs, awarding $4,263.70 in taxable costs but denying sanctions under Rule 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927.
-
639 F. Supp. 2d 1356·
S.D. Fla.·
2009-06-22
·cited 2×
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits for its copyright, trademark, or false advertising claims, and therefore denied the motion for a preliminary injunction.
-
634 F. Supp. 2d 1324·
M.D. Fla.·
2009-06-05
·cited 2×
The court held that plaintiffs have established a likelihood of success on their breach of contract claim based on defendants' financial defaults, justifying a preliminary injunction.