Request For Injunction

86 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• DOE v. McMILLAN
  442 F.2d 879· D.C. Cir.· 1971-03-11 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the injunction previously entered should be modified to permit the publication of names of students absent from school, and continued in effect pending expedited litigation.
• Molpus v. Porter L. Fortune, Jr.
  432 F.2d 916· 5th Cir.· 1970-10-05 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, finding that the University failed to meet the 'clear and present danger' test for denying a student's request to invite a speaker.
• Sea-Land Serv., Inc. v. Int'l Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union
  939 F.2d 866· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the action for lack of jurisdiction, vacating the dismissal and remanding for entry of judgment for the defendant-appellee.
• City of New Haven v. United States
  809 F.2d 900· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-20 ·cited 4×
  The unconstitutional legislative veto provision in section 1013 of the Impoundment Control Act is inseverable from the remainder of the section, rendering the entire section void.
• Guar. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Fed. Home Loan Bank Bd.
  794 F.2d 1339· 8th Cir.· 1986-07-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing Guaranty's action to remove a receiver appointed by the FHLBB, affirming the judgment.
• Cities Serv. GAS Co. v. Okla. TAX Comm'n
  656 F.2d 584· 10th Cir.· 1981-08-05 ·cited 4×
  Federal courts are barred by the Tax Injunction Act from enjoining or otherwise interfering with the collection of state taxes when a plain, speedy, and efficient remedy is available in state courts, regardless of the likelihood of success in those state courts.
• Feinberg v. The Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  522 F.2d 1335· D.C. Cir.· 1975-11-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's constitutional claims regarding the FDIC's suspension order and the statutory bar to judicial review were substantial enough to require a three-judge court.
• Rohe v. Froehlke
  500 F.2d 113· 2d Cir.· 1974-07-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Army Regulation implicitly grants a reservist the right to be informed of and rebut adverse factual allegations made during an appeal of an involuntary active duty order.
• Telerama, Inc. v. United States & Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n
  419 F.2d 1047· 6th Cir.· 1969-12-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the FCC's interpretation of 'new geographical area' was reasonable and that Telerama's equitable claims were not sufficient to overcome the regulatory scheme.
• The Socialist Workers Party v. Attorney General John L. Hill and Mayor Louie Welch
  483 F.2d 554· 5th Cir.· 1973-08-06 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a Texas statute requiring candidates to swear belief in and defense of the current representative form of government, and to resist any effort to subvert it, unconstitutionally infringes upon First Amendment rights.
• Lightfoot v. March Fong EU
  964 F.2d 865· 9th Cir.· 1992-05-18 ·cited 2×
  California Elections Code sections 6653 and 6661(a) do not violate the First Amendment rights of political parties to freedom of association, as the state's interest in ensuring a modicum of support for ballot access and in maintaining democratic nomination processes outweighs th
• PAN Am. World Airways, Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters
  894 F.2d 36· 2d Cir.· 1990-01-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that intermittent work stoppages by union employees are permissible self-help measures under the Railway Labor Act after major dispute procedures have been exhausted, and that the RLA does not impose a time limit on such rights.
• Kramer v. Mosbacher
  878 F.2d 134· 4th Cir.· 1989-06-20 ·cited 2×
  The district court lacked jurisdiction to hear the complaint and lacked authority to grant injunctive relief because the challenge to the regulation was untimely and the Magnuson Act prohibits injunctions pending review.
• Scottish AIR Int'l, Inc. v. British Caledonian Grp., PLC
  860 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1988-10-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred by dismissing the entire action on forum non conveniens grounds without considering the plaintiffs' claims for damages and contempt.
• Prestwich v. Internal Revenue Serv.
  796 F.2d 582· 1st Cir.· 1986-07-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the assessment and collection of child support amounts by the IRS under 26 U.S.C. § 6305(b).
• In re Nat'l Serv. Corp. v. Nat'l Serv. Corp.
  742 F.2d 859· 5th Cir.· 1984-09-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the proposed billboard message constituted pure speech, and the injunction against it was an impermissible prior restraint on First Amendment rights.
• McGREW v. Tarr
  469 F.2d 1087· 9th Cir.· 1972-11-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the 1971 amendments to the Selective Service Act did not reenact a ninety-day moratorium, and the authority to induct did not lapse.
• Hopson v. Asch
  457 F.2d 79· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-14 ·cited 2×
  Federal courts should not enjoin or grant declaratory relief for pending state court proceedings unless exceptional circumstances are present.
• Musick v. Jonsson
  449 F.2d 201· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the irreparable injury required for federal injunctive relief against the ordinance.
• Audrea Jones v. Dist. of Columbia Armory Bd.
  438 F.2d 138· D.C. Cir.· 1970-11-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Armory Board's refusal to rent the Armory to appellants was a reasonable exercise of its discretion and did not violate constitutional rights.
• Bhd. OF Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen v. Butte
  286 F.2d 706· 9th Cir.· 1961-01-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that appellants could not use supplemental pleadings to seek restoration of the status quo, as the original decree did not order such relief and their claims were untimely.
• Fuqua v. United Steelworkers OF Am. (AFL-CIO)
  253 F.2d 594· 6th Cir.· 1958-03-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in issuing a permanent injunction because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the clear and immediate danger of irreparable injury required for federal equitable intervention to restrain state criminal proceedings.
• Farmers Grain Co. v. Toledo
  158 F.2d 109· 7th Cir.· 1946-11-20 ·cited 2×
  The court should affirm the dismissal of the railroad's cross-complaint and order the issuance of a mandatory injunction compelling the railroad to resume operation, reversing the order appointing a receiver.
• Trump v. United States
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-09-05
  Former President Trump sought judicial oversight and the appointment of a special master to review documents and personal items seized from his residence in an FBI search on August 8, 2022, citing concerns about privilege protections and the return of personal property. The court
• Congreso de Uniones Industriales de Puerto RICO v. V.C.S. Nat'l Packing Co., Inc.
  953 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1991-12-27
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act prohibits injunctions in labor disputes, and the exception for injunctions in aid of arbitration does not apply when arbitration has not been sought.
• Beach Robo, Inc. v. Crown Cent. Petroleum, Inc
  860 F.2d 606· 4th Cir.· 1988-11-03
  The grandfather clause of the Virginia Petroleum Products Franchise Act exempts a retail gasoline outlet that was operated by a producer or refiner on July 1, 1979, even if subsequently operated by a company that is not a producer or refiner.
• Utils. Servs. Eng'g, Inc. v. Colo. Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council
  549 F.2d 173· 10th Cir.· 1977-02-03
  The dissenting judge would grant the injunctive relief sought by appellants.