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 Postal Serv. v. Oriental Nurseries, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 1980-06-17
  The court held that there was probable cause to believe the defendant's advertisements contained false representations, justifying the detention of mail pending administrative proceedings.
• JOS. Schlitz Brewing Co. Container Div. (Longview Tex. Container Plant) v. General Drivers
  618 F.2d 1184· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-24
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction, finding the district court's findings of fact and conclusions of law thorough.
• Design & Mfg. Corp. v. Int'l Union
  608 F.2d 767· 7th Cir.· 1979-12-17
  A federal court cannot enjoin a sympathy strike when the sole dispute is whether the strike violates a no-strike clause, even if that violation is subject to arbitration.
• Sydstead Corp. v. DeSOTO Park Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  376 So. 2d 876· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-10-17 ·via Temporary Injunction
  A condominium recreational lessee challenged an adjusted rent increase that occurred less than ten years from the lease commencement. The trial court granted an injunction based on a 1974 Florida statute prohibiting cost-of-living adjustments at intervals shorter than ten years.
• Melanson v. John J. Duane Co., Inc.
  605 F.2d 31· 1st Cir.· 1979-09-20
  The court held that a prolonged temporary restraining order should be treated as a preliminary injunction for appeal purposes and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to dissolve the injunction at that time.
• The City OF Miami v. Miami Dolphins, Ltd.
  374 So. 2d 1156· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-09-18 ·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the trial court properly determined the concessionaire had the exclusive right to sell beverages in the stadium based on the contract and parties' conduct.
• Kasser v. Popkin
  369 So. 2d 85· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-03-13 ·via Temporary Injunction
  Norman Kasser appeals a temporary injunction that halted his mortgage foreclosure action pending resolution of Ralph Popkin's suit over related real estate contracts. The court affirmed the injunction, finding the two contracts sufficiently related to warrant consolidation under
• Broward Cnty. Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council v. Hardin Constr. Co., Inc.
  365 So. 2d 449· Fla. 4th DCA· 1978-12-20 ·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the trial court erred in restricting the number and location of pickets without evidentiary support, but upheld the injunction against obstructing ingress and egress.
• Croft v. NEW York City Transit Auth. Police Dep't
  587 F.2d 575· 2d Cir.· 1978-11-29
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of a preliminary injunction, finding it reasonable to construe the consent decree as barring unilateral extension of the eligibility list.
• Se. Broach Co., Inc. v. Lebow
  48 Fla. Supp. 138· Broward Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1978-10-06 ·via Temporary Injunction
  Southeast Broach Co. sought a temporary injunction to prevent neighbors from constructing a tennis court and fence that would violate local setback requirements. The court denied most injunctive relief but imposed conditions on the fence and tennis court construction to mitigate
• Okla. State Dep't OF Health & Okla. Water Res. Bd. v. Lamberton
  582 F.2d 1267· 10th Cir.· 1978-09-11
  The preliminary injunction should be permitted to stand because the statute it enjoined has been declared unconstitutional.
• Eaton Corp. v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers
  580 F.2d 254· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-26
  The court held that the district court properly granted a preliminary injunction under the Boys Markets exception to the Norris-LaGuardia Act, as the collective bargaining agreement bound both parties to arbitrate and contained a no-strike clause violated by the Union's strike.
• Barabas v. Prudential Lines, Inc.
  577 F.2d 184· 2d Cir.· 1978-05-31
  The court held that the denial of a preliminary injunction was not improper because the plaintiffs did not make a sufficient showing of irreparable harm compared to the harm defendants would suffer.
• Inner Sunset Action Comm. v. Califano
  571 F.2d 1122· 9th Cir.· 1978-03-10
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction, finding no abuse of discretion or misapplication of law.
• Charles M. Reeder & Co. v. Interpart Corp.
  558 F.2d 351· 6th Cir.· 1977-06-29
  The court held that the district court's findings of fact supporting the preliminary injunction were not clearly erroneous, and the appeal was premature.
• Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. Lillie F. Fitzgerald (two cases). Appeal of Stephanae Fitzgerald. Appeal of Edith L. Fitzgerald. Lillie Fitzgerald v. The Ohio State Life Ins. Co.
  556 F.2d 72· D.C. Cir.· 1977-05-27
  The court held that the May 19 injunction did not prohibit the insured from changing beneficiaries, and thus the beneficiary changes made after that injunction were valid.
• Kan. Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  554 F.2d 1178· D.C. Cir.· 1977-04-07
  The Federal Power Commission (FPC) was not compelled by California v. FPC to defer consideration of a merger application under the Federal Power Act pending resolution of a private antitrust suit.
• Sunbeam Television Corp. v. Shevin
  45 Fla. Supp. 53· Fla. Cir. Ct.· 1977-01-14 ·via Temporary Injunction
  Sunbeam Television Corporation and the Miami Herald Publishing Company challenged the constitutionality of Florida's 1974 amendment to Chapter 934 (the Security of Communications Act), which prohibited electronic recording of conversations without all parties' consent. The court
• Forte Towers, Inc. v. City OF Miami Beach
  340 So. 2d 514· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-12-07 ·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the portion of the order requiring the return of rents was premature and determined the merits of the cause before trial.
• Johnson v. Preben Johansen
  338 So. 2d 1300· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-11-02 ·via Temporary Injunction
  This case addresses whether a city council has the power to remove its president mid-term without explicit charter authorization. The Florida District Court of Appeal held that a legislative body possesses the inherent common law and parliamentary right to remove its presiding of
• Boca Linda E. Ass'n, Inc. v. McADAM
  44 Fla. Supp. 169· Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1976-07-20 ·via Temporary Injunction
  The court held that the defendant did not waive the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction by failing to assert it, as her actions were reasonable given the circumstances.
• United States v. Gannaway
  536 F.2d 784· 8th Cir.· 1976-06-09
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction to restore a barricade on a road within a public use area.
• Manes Merrit v. Libby
  533 F.2d 1310· 2d Cir.· 1976-04-05
  The denial of a preliminary injunction was proper because plaintiffs have an adequate remedy at law for damages if they prevail on the merits of their federal securities law claims.
• Brady v. The State BAR OF Cal.
  533 F.2d 502· 9th Cir.· 1976-04-02
  The court held that the district court properly refused to convene a three-judge court and properly dismissed the action for failure to state a claim.
• Bartel v. Miami Herald Publ'g Co.
  44 Fla. Supp. 5· Broward Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1976-03-17 ·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
• Roberts v. Arledge
  519 F.2d 1129· 5th Cir.· 1975-09-26
  The court affirmed the denial of preliminary injunctive relief, finding no clear abuse of discretion by the district court.
• State of Fla. ex rel. Darrell D. Burgess & United Realty Equities Inv. Corp. v. Town OF Davie
  316 So. 2d 635· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-08-08 ·via Temporary Injunction
• Spiegel v. City OF Hallandale
  42 Fla. Supp. 177· Broward Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1975-07-17 ·via Temporary Injunction
  A circuit court granted a temporary injunction halting a recall election against two Hallandale city commissioners, finding that the recall petition failed to allege legally sufficient grounds for removal. The court held that the charges—primarily disagreement over the city manag
• NEW Smyrna Yellow CAB Co., Inc. v. Volusia Yellow CAB Co.
  315 So. 2d 514· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-06-30 ·via Temporary Injunction
  New Smyrna Yellow Cab appealed from a trial court order modifying a temporary injunction to prohibit use of yellow-colored taxi cabs in a portion of Volusia County. The appellate court reversed, finding the modification was an abuse of discretion as a temporary injunction, withou
• Health Care Servs. v. Shevin
  311 So. 2d 760· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-04-22 ·via Temporary Injunction
  Florida appellate court affirmed a temporary injunction against health care services company from advertising or selling weight-reducing treatments using unapproved drugs, but narrowed the geographic scope from statewide to Dade County only.
• City OF Boston v. Brinegar
  512 F.2d 319· 1st Cir.· 1975-03-05
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because subsequent events, including a state court injunction and the issuance of a federal environmental impact statement, have resolved the issues raised.
• McKENNA v. Fargo
  510 F.2d 1179· 3d Cir.· 1975-02-11
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the case for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction and that the appeal was not moot.
• United States v. State OF Tex.
  508 F.2d 98· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-03
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting a preliminary injunction against the creation of splinter school districts, as it would likely violate a prior desegregation order and adversely affect the remaining district.
• Minn. Pub. Interest Research Grp. v. Butz
  508 F.2d 892· 8th Cir.· 1975-01-06 ·via Temporary Injunction
  The court granted consolidation of appeals but denied the motion to expedite the hearing.
• Local 391 v. Hiram H. Ward
  501 F.2d 456· 4th Cir.· 1974-05-21
  The court held that the district court must hear and decide the unions' motions to dissolve the injunction before adjudicating the contempt motion.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Guar. Bond & Sec. Corp.
  496 F.2d 145· 6th Cir.· 1974-04-23
  The Securities Investor Protection Act (SIPA) applies to a broker-dealer that conducted substantial business after the Act's effective date, even if it was in financial difficulty prior to enactment, and a receiver has standing to seek enforcement of SIPA.
• Johnson v. City OF Belle Glade
  41 Fla. Supp. 189· Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1974-02-13 ·via Temporary Injunction
  Johnson sought an injunction to prevent Belle Glade and Pahokee from arresting and prosecuting him for operating a taxi, claiming he operated only casually or incidentally within the cities and was being selectively harassed. The court denied the injunction, holding that equity i
• I. C. Sales, Inc. v. City OF N. Miami
  281 So. 2d 511· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-07-31 ·via Temporary Injunction
  I.C. Sales, Inc. challenged a North Miami occupational license tax on vending machines as exceeding statutory limits and being confiscatory. The court affirmed dismissal of the complaint, holding that the 1972 legislature's repeal and replacement of the occupational license tax s
• Unique Caterers, Inc. v. Pollifrone
  279 So. 2d 345· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-06-19 ·via Temporary Injunction
  An interlocutory order requiring a corporation to provide five days' notice before selling or conveying a major or material portion of its assets must be reversed as too vague and indefinite regarding the corporation's permitted and prohibited actions, the type of notice required
• Franklin v. Brown
  279 So. 2d 83· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-06-12 ·via Injunction Pendente Lite
  The Florida District Court of Appeal declined to answer certified questions from a circuit court regarding whether the proceeds of a savings account held in trust for a named beneficiary are estate assets subject to creditor claims and whether a court may temporarily restrain dis
• Kohner v. Wechsler
  477 F.2d 666· 2d Cir.· 1973-04-06
  The court held that the trial court erred in terminating the escrow agreement, as it should remain in effect according to its terms.
• Nat'l Am. Life Ins. Co. v. Wilder
  473 F.2d 1387· 5th Cir.· 1973-03-16
  The court held that the district court did not err in staying proceedings and denying temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions, nor in refusing to file a counterclaim violating Rule 8(a).
• Asa H. Asher, Jr. v. Laird
  475 F.2d 360· D.C. Cir.· 1973-02-05 ·via Preliminary Injunction Standard
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction because the appellants failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits and did not show irreparable harm.
• Serv-Air v. Seamans
  473 F.2d 158· D.C. Cir.· 1972-11-20
  The court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, finding no probability of success on the merits for the plaintiff's claims regarding contract award procedures and wage compliance.
• Bryant v. E. Baton Rouge Parish Sch. Bd.
  466 F.2d 519· 5th Cir.· 1972-09-20
  The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal because the District Court's order was not a refusal of an injunction, and thus not an appealable interlocutory order.
• Executive Unif. Rental, Inc. v. Sanitary Linen Serv. Co. OF Fla.
  265 So. 2d 392· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-08-01 ·via Temporary Injunction
  Executive Uniform Rental and Laundromation Corp. appealed a temporary injunction issued without notice by a trial court. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the injunction, holding that while prior notice would have been better practice, the chancellor did not abuse his d
• Jewel Phillips v. The Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist.
  464 F.2d 90· 5th Cir.· 1972-07-14 ·via Temporary Injunction
  The court pretermitted a decision on the temporary injunction as it was moot and remanded the case for disposition of the declaratory judgment issue.
• Harris v. Rockefeller
  453 F.2d 1228· 2d Cir.· 1972-01-10
  The court held that denial of preliminary injunction was not an abuse of discretion because the private treatment centers had not obtained all requisite licenses for methadone maintenance treatment reimbursement.
• Wally v. Tarr
  452 F.2d 1204· 2d Cir.· 1971-12-07
  The court held that the 1971 amendments to the Selective Service Act did not reenact the 90-day induction moratorium provision of section 20 of the 1948 Act.
• Sloup v. Hershey
  457 F.2d 148· 7th Cir.· 1971-11-22
  The court held that the plaintiff's failure to reinstate his case within the judicially imposed 90-day deadline terminated his right to reinstatement, and the subsequent dismissal for want of prosecution was proper.