Dole Fresh Fruit Co. v. United Banana Co., Inc., Stanton Zebroski, Raymond Zebroski and Michael Lee

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that Rule 65(d) does not require actual notice to a party’s “officers, agents, servants, employees [or] attorneys”
• vacating contempt orders against two officers and one office manager of a company where the order to show cause named only the company on the basis that they “were entitled to notice that they were defendants in a contempt proceeding and adequate time to prepare a defense”
• notice to the corporation that it is a defendant in a contempt hearing is not sufficient formal notice to its officers
• notice to the corporation that it is a defendant in a contempt hearing is not sufficient formal notice to its officers
• officers and employees subject to injunction under Rule 65(d) even if they “were not parties to the underlying action and were not personally served”
• remanding contempt proceeding for new hearing having found notice inadequate

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).