Sumpter et al v. Hungerford et al

Filing 6

ORDER dismissing w/o prej the 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; FURTHER ORDERED that the 2 Motion for appt of temporary receiver is dismissed as premature and the 3 Motion to Expedite is dismissed as moot. Signed by Judge Lance M Africk. (car, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

TERRENCE K. SUMPTER, ET AL.

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

No. 12-717

WILLIAM B. HUNGERFORD, ET AL.

SECTION I
ORDER

Considering the ex parte motion1 for preliminary injunction and appointment of a
temporary receiver,
IT IS ORDERED that the ex parte motion for preliminary injunction is DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE as this Court may issue a preliminary injunction only on notice to the
adverse party. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(1). See also Consolidation Coal Co. v. Disabled Miners
of S.W. Va., 442 F.2d 1261, 1269 (4th Cir. 1971) (holding that issuance of an ex parte
preliminary injunction is “manifestly error, because Rule 65(a)(1) is explicit that ‘no preliminary
injunction shall be issued without notice to the adverse party . . . .’ ”; 11A Charles Alan Wright,
Et Al., Federal Practice and Procedure, § 2949 (2d ed. 2011).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion2 for appointment of a temporary receiver
is DISMISSED AS PREMATURE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion3 to expedite hearing on the above
motions is DISMISSED AS MOOT.

1

R. Doc. No. 2.
R. Doc. No. 2.
3
R. Doc. No. 3.
2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion4 to expedite discovery is REFERRED to
U.S. Magistrate Judge Alma L. Chasez.

New Orleans, Louisiana, March 16, 2012.

__________________________________
LANCE M. AFRICK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4

R. Doc. No. 4.