Motion for Preliminary Injunction in South Carolina

Understanding the Purpose and Significance of a Motion for Preliminary Injunction

“The purpose of a preliminary injunction is to preserve the status quo and prevent irreparable harm to the party requesting it.” (See Compton v. South Carolina Dept. of Corr (2011) 392 S.C. 361, 366; Powell v. Immanuel Baptist Church (1973) 261 S.C. 219, 221, 199 S.E.2d 60, 61.)

“An applicant for a preliminary injunction must allege sufficient facts to state a cause of action for injunction and demonstrate that this relief is reasonably necessary to preserve the rights of the parties during the litigation.” (See id; County of Richland v. Simpkins (2002) 348 S.C. 664, 669, 560 S.E.2d 902, 904.)

“To obtain an injunction, a party must demonstrate irreparable harm, a likelihood of success on the merits, and the absence of an adequate remedy at law." (See Denman v. City of Columbia (2010) 387 S.C. 131, 140, 691 S.E.2d 465, 470; Richland Cnty. v. S.C. Dep't of Revenue (2018) 422 S.C. 292, 310.)

Rules for a Preliminary Injunction

Rule 65 of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure governs temporary restraining orders and temporary injunctions.

“No temporary injunction shall be issued without notice to the adverse party.” (See S.C. R. Civ. P. 65(a).)

“No temporary restraining order shall be granted without notice of motion for the order to the adverse party unless it clearly appears from specific facts shown by affidavit or by a 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 S.C. R. Civ. P. 65(b).)

“Every temporary restraining order granted without notice shall be endorsed with the date and hour of issuance; shall be filed forthwith in the clerk's office and entered of record; shall be served, together with a summons and complaint in the event no summons and complaint have previously been served in the action, upon the adverse party in accordance with the provisions of Rule 4; shall define the injury and state why it is irreparable and why the order was granted without notice; and shall expire by its terms within such time after entry, not to exceed 10 days, as the court fixes, unless within the time so fixed the order, for good cause shown, is extended for a like period or unless the party against whom the order is directed consents that it may be extended for a longer period.” (See id.)

“The reasons for the extension shall be entered of record. In case a temporary restraining order is granted without notice, the motion for a temporary injunction shall be set down for hearing at the earliest possible time and takes precedence of all matters except older matters of the same character; and when the motion comes on for hearing the party who obtained the temporary restraining order shall proceed with the application for a temporary injunction and, if he does not do so, the court shall dissolve the temporary restraining order.” (See id.)

“On two days' notice to the party who obtained the temporary restraining order without notice or on such shorter notice to that party as the court may prescribe, the adverse party may appear and move its dissolution or modification and in that event the court shall proceed to hear and determine such motion as expeditiously as the ends of justice require.” (See id.)

Discretion of the Court in Deciding a Motion for Preliminary Injunction

“Whether to grant a preliminary injunction is left to the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be overturned unless it is clearly erroneous.” (See Compton v. South Carolina Dept. of Corr (2011) 392 S.C. 361, 366-67; Atwood Agency v.Black (2007) 374 S.C. 68, 72, 646 S.E.2d 882, 884.)

“An order granting or denying an injunction is reviewed for abuse of discretion." (See Strategic Res. Co. v. BCS Life Ins. Co. (2006) 367 S.C. 540, 544, 627 S.E.2d 687, 689; Richland Cnty. v. S.C. Dep't of Revenue (2018) 422 S.C. 292, 309.)

“An abuse of discretion occurs when a trial court's decision is unsupported by the evidence or controlled by an error of law." (See Newton v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals for Beaufort Cnty. (2011) 396 S.C. 112, 116, 719 S.E.2d 282, 284; Dewberry 334 Meeting St. LLC v. City of Charleston, No. 2021-UP-360, at *5 (S.C. Ct. App. Oct. 20, 2021).)

“In evaluating whether a plaintiff is entitled to a preliminary injunction, the court must examine the merits of the underlying case only to the extent necessary to determine whether the plaintiff has made a sufficient prima facie showing of entitlement to relief.” (See Compton v. South Carolina Dept. of Corr (2011) 392 S.C. 361, 366-67; Helsel v. City of N. Myrtle Beach (1992) 307 S.C. 29, 32, 413 S.E.2d 824, 826.)

Legal Precedents and Case Law on a Motion for Preliminary Injunction

It is well settled that “an injunction is a drastic remedy issued by the court in its discretion to prevent irreparable harm suffered by the plaintiff.” (See Brock v. Town of Mount Pleasant, Appellate No. 2012-208787, at *7 (S.C. Ct. App. Nov. 5, 2014).)

As such, it is also well settled that “in determining whether a temporary injunction should issue, the merits of the case are not to be considered, except in so far as they may enable the court to determine whether a prima facie showing has been made. When a prima facie showing has been made entitling plaintiff to injunctive relief, a temporary injunction will be granted without regard to the ultimate termination of the case on the merits.” (See Allegro, Inc. v. Scully, Opinion No. 4997, at *10 (S.C. Ct. App. July 11, 2012); Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp. v. Porter (1969) 252 S.C. 478, 481, 167 S.E.2d 313, 315.)