Nwachukwu v. Liberty Bank

Filing 9

INITIAL ORDER (see attached) on Plaintiff's 1 Motion for Exparte Writ of Temporary Restraining Order and/or Injunction. The Court will hear oral argument on the motion on May 12, 2016, at 2:00 p.m. in the 17th Floor Courtroom of the Connecticut Financial Center, 157 Church Street, New Haven, Connecticut. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on May 10, 2016. (Overbey, C.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
ANTHONY NWACHUKWU,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 3:16-cv-704 (CSH)

LIBERTY BANK
Defendant

May 10, 2016

INITIAL ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER AND/OR INJUNCTION
HAIGHT, Senior District Judge:
The Court construes Plaintiff's Motion [Doc. 1] as one for a temporary restraining order
("TRO") and/or a preliminary injunction. The case is governed by Rule 65 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure.
The Court will conduct a hearing on Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction on
Thursday, May 12, 2016, at 2:00 p.m., in the courtroom on the 17th floor of 157 Church Street,
New Haven, Connecticut.
Plaintiff's motion includes a request for an ex parte TRO. That aspect of the motion is
DENIED. Rule 65(b)(1)(A) provides that a TRO may issue without notice to the adverse party
only if "specific facts in an affidavit or verified complaint show that immediate and irreparable
injury, loss or damage will result to the movant before the adverse party can be heard in
opposition." Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1)(A). There is no indication, let alone a showing, that
Plaintiff will suffer immediate and irreparable harm if the prayed-for TRO is not issued before
the hearing in two days' time. According to the letter of bank officer Fujio [Doc. 4-1], the

Defendant Bank proposes to close Plaintiff's three accounts (or has already done so) and in either
event, send Plaintiff "a check for the combined businesses." Plaintiff's complaint [Doc.4] prays
that his accounts be kept open, or reopened if they have been closed. If Plaintiff wins his case on
the merits, so that the Bank's closing of the accounts is adjudged to be unlawful and must be
reopened, no irreparable harm is presently discernible. Plaintiff alleges that various
consequential damages have or might occur following a wrongful closing of the accounts. If
such damages are proven to have occurred, they appear to be compensable by money damages.
The hearing will consider whether a preliminary injunction should issue. Counsel for
Plaintiff must be prepared to discuss, among other issues, the question of irreparable injury, and
the basis for this Court's subject matter jurisdiction.
It is SO ORDERED.
Dated: New Haven, Connecticut
May 10, 2016

/s/ Charles S. Haight, Jr.
CHARLES S. HAIGHT, JR.
Senior United States District Judge