Favors-Morrell v. United States
Filing
5
ORDER Denying 1 Plaintiff's Petition for Emergency Injunction. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 2/18/2015. (csr)
3 Me Uniteb otatto flttrttt Court
for the boutbern Thtritt of aeorsia
Jorun.010itk Bibiiou
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ANGELA FAVORS-MORRELL,
Plaintiff,
V.
UNITED STATES
Defendant.
CV 215-19
ORDER
Pro se Plaintiff Angela Favors-Morrell seeks an "emergency
injunction" to prevent the sale of items stored in Canal Road
Self Storage, located at 700 Canal Road in Brunswick, Georgia.
Plaintiff asserts that the units "contain property and documents
used as evidence for the legal actions filed and items and VA
medical records of Mr. Tony Morrell." Plaintiff states that she
and Tony Morrell are homeless, there has been no authorization
for a change of venue, and she and Tony Morrell "were forced to
put all items in storage." Dkt. No. 1.
Construing the pro se Plaintiff's motion liberally,
Plaintiff's "Petition for Emergency Injunction" seeks a
temporary restraining order. To obtain a temporary restraining
order, a party must demonstrate
[that there is] a substantial likelihood of
(1)
success on the merits; (2) that irreparable injury
AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)
I
I
will be suffered if the relief is not granted; (3)
that the threatened injury outweighs the harm the
relief would inflict on the non-movant; and (4) that
the entry of the relief would serve the public
interest.
Schiavo ex rel. Schindler v. Schiavo, 403 F.3d 1223, 1225-26
(11th Cir. 2005)
"[A] court may issue a preliminary injunction only on
notice to the adverse party." Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a) (1); see
also United States v. Kaley, 579 F.3d 1246, 1263-64 (11th Cir.
2009) (Tjoflat, J., specially concurring) (reiterating this
requirement). Defendants have not yet been served with process
in this case, and the required notice has not been given.
Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction
must be denied.
"In extraordinary situations, Rule 65 . . . provides an
exception to the general rule of prior notice and a hearing."
Kaley, 579 F.3d at 1264. A court may issue a temporary
restraining order without notice, but only if Plaintiff meets
the requirements of Rule 65(b) (1).
The court may issue a temporary restraining order
without written or oral notice to the adverse party or
its attorney only if:
(A) specific facts in an affidavit or a verified
complaint clearly show that immediate and
irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result
to the movant before the adverse party can be
heard in opposition; and
(B) the movant's attorney certifies in writing
any efforts made to give notice and the reasons
why it should not be required.
AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)
I
I
2
Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1).
The Court declines to issue a temporary restraining order
at this time because Plaintiff has not submitted a verified
complaint or affidavit containing specific facts showing that
immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damages will result.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 (b) (1) (A) . Nor has Plaintiff certified in
writing any efforts made to give notice to Defendants or the
reasons why the Court should proceed without notice to
Defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b) (1) (B). "The requirements
of Rule 65(b) (1) are not merely technical niceties that a court
may easily disregard, but rather crucial safeguards of due
process. Although the Court must construe [Plaintiff's] pro se
pleadings liberally, that does not excuse [her] from compliance
with substantive law and procedural rules." Ferguson v. Aurora
Loan Servs., No. CV410-174, 2010 WL 4286194, at *1 (S.D. Ga.
Oct. 22, 2010) (internal citations omitted) (denying plaintiff's
motion for temporary injunction without notice because of
plaintiff's failure to comply with either component of Rule
65(b) (1))
Plaintiff's Petition for Emergency Injunction is hereby
DENIED.
AO 72A
(Rev. 8182)
3
I
SO ORDERED, this 18 " day of February, 2015.
LISA GODBEY WOOD, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
A0 72A
(Rev. 8/82)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?