A Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) is a legal provision issued by a court to offer immediate, short-term protection to an individual, group, or entity. This court order temporarily prevents another party from carrying out certain activities that could potentially lead to harm or damage.
To secure a TRO, the party in need must submit a motion or application to the court. This application should clearly illustrate the urgency and necessity of the order to avert imminent harm or irreparable injury.
It's crucial to understand that the specific procedures and prerequisites for obtaining a TRO can differ slightly across states due to variations in laws and regulations.
For a more detailed understanding, we have curated a list of resources that include links to each state's court authorities' legal motions. These resources not only help you comprehend the unique requirements and processes for obtaining a TRO in your respective state but also provide real-life examples and citations of law for each state. This practical approach ensures that you gain a comprehensive understanding of the Temporary Restraining Order process, backed by actual case studies and legal references.
In Arkansas v. Moody, the Arkansas Supreme Court decided that “[t]he temporary restraining order is dissolved for failure to join the Bryant School District, a necessary party under Ark. R. Civ. P. 19 (2006), prior to the issuance of the temporary restraining order.” (Arkansas v. Moody (2006) 367 Ark. 181…)
It is also well settled that “Rule 65(c)(1) provides that the court may issue a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order only if the movant gives security in such amount as the court considers proper to pay the costs and damages sustained by any party found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained.” (See Ariz. Corp. Comm'n v. Johnson Utilities, L.L.C., No. 2 CA-CV 2018-0162, at *7 (Ariz. Ct. App. July 2, 2019).)
A temporary restraining order may issue when “[i]t appears from facts shown by affidavit or by the verified complaint that great or irreparable injury will result to the applicant before the matter can be heard on notice.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 527(c)(1).) “[T]rial courts should evaluate two interrelated factors when deciding whether or not to issue [a restraining order]. The first is the likelihood that the plaintiff will…”
“The purpose of a temporary restraining order (TRO) is to prevent immediate and irreparable harm to one of the parties in a lawsuit.” (See Mile High Kennel Club v. Colo. Greyhound Breeders Ass'n (1977) 559 P.2d 1120, 1121; City of Golden v. Simpson (2004) 83 P.3d 87…)
“The plaintiff seeking injunctive relief bears the burden of proving facts which will establish irreparable harm as a result of that violation.” (Aqleh v. Cadlerock Joint Venture II, L.P. (2010) 299 Conn. 84, 97-98 quoting Karls v. Alexandra Realty Corp. (1980) 179 Conn. 390…)
“A restraining order may be entered in a proper case to preserve the status quo and to prevent immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage. However, such a drastic order should not be granted unless earned both on the basis of the facts and the applicable law.” (See Levin v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (1966) 43 Del. Ch. 168…)
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(a)(1) requires that a temporary restraining order can be granted without written or oral notice to the adverse party only if it appears that “immediate and irreparable injury . . . will result to the movant before the adverse party can be heard in opposition" and "the movant's attorney certifies in writing any efforts that have been made to give…”
“While a temporary restraining order is not a judgment which is directly appealable under OCGA § 5-6-34, § 5-6-34 (a)(5) permits an appeal from orders refusing to vacate a temporary restraining order.” (United Food & Commercial Workers Union v. Amberjack, Ltd. (1984) 253 Ga. 438 citing George v. George (1973) 231 Ga. 296.)
The purpose of a Temporary Restraining Order [“TRO”] “is to allow the trial court to preserve the status quo until it can hold a hearing to determine whether it should grant a preliminary injunction.” (Hirschauer v. Chicago Sun-Times (1989) 192 Ill. App. 3d 193, 199-200 citing Stocker Hinge Manufacturing Co. v. Darnel Industries, Inc. (1983) 94 Ill.2d 535…)
“Ind. Trial Rule 65(B) requires the plaintiff requesting a temporary restraining order to file an affidavit or verified complaint.” (See Hedge v. Susi Spa (1999) 705 N.E.2d 1043 …)
“Rule 65(d) allows a judge, for good cause shown, to issue an injunction that binds not only the parties to the action, but also those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the order.” (See Sommer v. Maharaj (2006) 65 Mass. App. Ct. 657…)
“An injunction or temporary restraining order may not be granted in one action to stay proceedings in another action pending in another court if the relief requested could be sought in the other pending action.” (Marsh v. Foremost Ins Co. (1996) 451 Mich. 62…)
“A reviewing court will not disturb that decision absent a clear abuse of discretion.” (See Carl Bolander Sons Co. v. City of Minneapolis (1993) 502 N.W.2d 203…)
“The purpose of a temporary restraining order is to maintain the status quo of the parties pending the resolution of their claims, which generally involves the issuance or denial of preliminary and permanent injunctions.” (See Grist v. Grist (1997) 946 S.W.2d 780…)
“Rule 65(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure permits the issuance of temporary restraining orders without notice to the adverse party if it clearly appears from specific facts shown by affidavit or by verified complaint that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the applicant before notice can be served and a hearing had thereon." (See Jolliff v. Winslow (1974) 24 N.C. App. 107 …)
“The granting of a temporary restraining order does not create a right, but merely protects the rights of a complainant by maintaining the status quo until such time that a show cause hearing on the temporary injunction can be held.” (See Amerada Hess Corp. v. Furlong Oil Minerals (1983) 336 N.W.2d 129…)
“If the motion for a protective order is denied in whole or in part, the court may, on such terms and conditions as are just, order that any party or person provide or permit discovery.” (See Estate of Frankl v. Goodyear Tire (2003) 373 N.J. Super. 509…)
A Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) “is a species of injunctive relief, similar to a preliminary injunction but for its expiration after a limited period of time and, under particular circumstances, its issuance without notice to the adverse party.” (Grisham v. Romero (2021) 483 P.3d 545…)
“NRAP 3A(b)(3) creates a right of interlocutory appeal from orders ‘granting or refusing to grant an injunction or dissolving or refusing to dissolve an injunction.’ Such jurisdiction is limited to preliminary or permanent injunctions; does not reach temporary restraining orders, which are too short-lived to sustain interlocutory appellate review.” (Hospitality Int'l Grp. v. Gratitude Grp., LLC, No. 69585, at *2-3 [Nev. Dec. 2, 2016] citing Sicor, Inc. v. Sacks (2011) 127 Nev. 896…)
An application for a temporary restraining order is brought pursuant to CPLR 6313. Movant must demonstrate “a probability of success on the merits, danger of irreparable injury in the absence of an injunction and a balance of equities in [their] favor.” (See Nobu Next Door, LLC v Fine Arts Hous., Inc. (2005) 4 N.Y.3d…)
“The rationale behind this determination is that a temporary restraining order is provisional in nature and employed to preserve the status quo of a case pending a request for a preliminary or permanent injunction.” (In the Matter of Estate of Georskey, Accelerated No. 2000-G-2299, at *1 [Ohio Ct. App. July 20, 2001] citing Tollis at 148; Childs at 4; Kroger at 1. See, also, Staff Notes to Civ.R. 65.)
“Granting or denying injunctive relief is generally within the sound discretion of the trial court a judgment issuing or refusing to issue an injunction will not be disturbed on appeal unless the lower court has abused its discretion or the decision is clearly against the weight of the evidence.” (See Meinders v. Johnson (2006) 134 P.3d 858…)
“The granting or refusal of restraining orders was said to rest in the sound discretion of the court.” (See Blair v. Blair (1953) 199 Or. 273…)
“Pennsylvania procedure does not speak in terms of Temporary Restraining Orders, but only in terms of preliminary injunctions. However, our functional analogue of the Temporary Restraining Order is the ex parte Preliminary Injunction without hearing.” Bloomingdale's by Mail Ltd. v. Commonwealth (1986) 513 Pa. 149…)
It is well settled that pursuant to Super.R. Civ.P. 65(b) “any temporary restraining order granted without notice shall expire within ten days of issuance unless extended for an additional period either by consent or for good cause shown after a hearing and also stress that where a temporary restraining order is granted without notice, a hearing on the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction shall be conducted as soon as possible.” (See Intern. Packaging Corp. v. N R G Coal Corp. (1982) 442 A.2d 435…)
It is well settled that Super.R. Civ.P. 65(b) “stipulates that any temporary restraining order granted without notice shall expire within ten days of issuance unless extended for an additional period either by consent or for good cause shown after a hearing and also stress that where a temporary restraining order is granted without notice, a hearing on the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction shall be conducted as soon as possible.” (See Intern. Packaging Corp. v. N R G Coal Corp. (1982) 442 A.2d 435…)
A temporary restraining order may be granted without notice to the adverse party if it clearly appears from specific facts shown by affidavit or by the verified complaint that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the applicant before notice can be served and a hearing held. (Tex. R. Civ. P. 680.) The affidavit must be based on…
"A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right." (See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc. (2008) 555 U.S. 7, 24, 129 S.Ct. 365, 172 L.Ed.2d 249; Taylor v. Town of Cabot (2017) 178 A.3d 313…)
“A preliminary injunction serves the same general purpose as a temporary restraining order — to preserve the status quo until the trial court can conduct a full hearing on the merits of the complaint.” (See McLean v. Smith (1971) 4 Wn. App. 394, 482 P.2d 798 (1971); Northwest Gas Ass'n v. Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission (2007) 141 Wn. App. 98…)
It is well settled that “notice need not be given to the defendants prior to the issuance of a temporary restraining order under this subsection. The court may grant the temporary restraining order at any time before the hearing and determination of the application for an interlocutory injunction.” (See Spearman v. DuPree (1983) 116 Wis. 2d 664…)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.
Your subscription has successfully been upgraded.
Your content views addon has successfully been added.
No Worries!
Adding your team is easy
in the "Manage Company Users" tab
