Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order

Federal Law

A preliminary injunction is an order to stop a party from engaging in certain conduct while the litigation is pending; it can only issue after notice and a hearing. A temporary restraining order can accomplish the same result without notice or a hearing in certain circumstances. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65.

 

The Eighth Circuit uses a four-factor test in determining whether a party is entitled to a preliminary injunction: (1) the probability that the movant will succeed on the merits; (2) the threat of irreparable harm; (3) the balance between the harm and the injury that granting the injunction will inflict on the parties, and (4) the public interest. Dataphase Sys. Inc. v. CL Sys., Inc., 640 F.2d 109 (8th Cir. 1981).

 

Most intellectual property violations can qualify as irreparable harm. As a result, intellectual property litigation often involves a motion for preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order.

 

Arkansas Law

The Arkansas rule differs in two significant respects. First, Arkansas does not distinguish between a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order. See Ark. R. Civ. P. 65. Second, the only factors considered are likelihood of success and irreparable harm. See id.; W.E. Long Co. v. Holsum Baking Co., 307 Ark. 345 (1991).

 

Trackbacks (3) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.arbusinesslitigation.com/admin/trackback/21901
Arkansas Business Litigation Blog - March 21, 2008 9:10 AM
The district court of South Dakota denied a preliminary injunction in Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Schmidt, 2008 WL 631197 (D.S.D. 3/6/08). Schmidt was an employee of Universal selling property, casualty and life insurance products to automobile ...
Arkansas Business Litigation Blog - March 28, 2008 1:13 PM
The Eastern District of Missouri granted a temporary restraining order based on trademark infringement in Sensient Technologies Corp. v. SensoryFlavors, Inc., 2008 WL 762092 (E.D. Mo. 3/21/08). Sensient Technologies is the corporate umbrella that used ...
Arkansas Business Litigation Blog - May 1, 2008 5:07 PM
The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed a preliminary injunction in Freeman v. Brown Hiller, Inc., No. 07-717 (4/2/08). Freeman was an insurance agent for BHC. She signed a limited noncompete agreement that prohibited her from soliciting BHC customers f...
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?