Gordon v. Impulse Marketing Group Inc

Filing 382

ORDER DENYING THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION Denying Motions: 302 , 305 , 307 , 309 , and 311 . Signed by Judge Fred Van Sickle. (SAP, Case Administrator)

Gordon v. Impulse Marketing Group Inc

Doc. 382

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 382

Filed 05/22/2006

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

JAMES S. GORDON, JR., an individual residing in Benton County, Washington, Plaintiff, v. IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC.,a Nevada Corporation, Defendant. IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC., Third-Party Plaintiff, v. BONNIE GORDON, JAMES S. GORDON, III, JONATHAN GORDON, JAMILA GORDON, ROBERT PRITCHETT and EMILY ABBEY, Third-Party Defendants.

No. CV-04-5125-FVS ORDER DENYING THIRDPARTY DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION

BEFORE THE COURT are Motions for Temporary Injunction brought by Third-Party Defendants Jamila Gordon (Ct. Rec. 302), Bonnie Gordon (Ct. Rec. 305), Jonathan Gordon (Ct. Rec. 307), James Gordon, III (Ct. Rec. 309), and Emily Abbey (Ct. Rec. 311). Defendants are proceeding pro se. Third-Party

Third-Party Plaintiff Impulse

Marketing Group is represented by Floyd Ivey, Sean Moynihan, and Peter Glantz. ORDER DENYING THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION - 1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 382

Filed 05/22/2006

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Third-Party Defendants request the Court issue a temporary injunction enjoining Impulse Marketing and "all its marketing partners, past, present and future" from (1) doing business in the State of Georgia; (2) sending emails to Third-Party Defendants; and (3) sending emails to all Washington State residents until this case has been adjudicated. Impulse Marketing opposes the issuance of a

temporary injunction on the basis that Third-Party Defendants noted their motions for hearing on the same day they filed their motions. An injunction is an equitable remedy that should be used sparingly. Kucera v. Dept. of Transp., 140 Wash.2d 200, 209, 995 Therefore, injunctive relief will not be granted

P.2d 63, 68 (2000).

where there is a plain, complete, speedy and adequate remedy at law. Id. "One who seeks relief by temporary or permanent injunction must

show (1) that he has a clear legal or equitable right, (2) that he has a well-grounded fear of immediate invasion of that right, and (3) that the acts complained of are either resulting in or will result in actual and substantial injury to him." Id. "If a party seeking a

preliminary injunction fails to establish any one of these requirements, the requested relief must be denied." P.2d at 69. Here, Third-Party Defendants have failed to allege or demonstrate the absence of a complete and adequate remedy at law. Thus, the Court denies Third-Party Defendants' motions for temporary injunction on this basis. Accordingly, Id. at 210, 995

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motions for Temporary Injunction brought by Third-Party Defendants Jamila Gordon (Ct. Rec. 302), ORDER DENYING THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION - 2

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 382

Filed 05/22/2006

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Bonnie Gordon (Ct. Rec. 305), Jonathan Gordon (Ct. Rec. 307), James Gordon, III (Ct. Rec. 309), and Emily Abbey (Ct. Rec. 311) are DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Executive is hereby

directed to enter this Order, furnish copies to counsel and ThirdParty Defendants who are proceeding pro se. DATED this 22nd day of May, 2006. s/ Fred Van Sickle Fred Van Sickle United States District Judge

ORDER DENYING THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION - 3