Motion for Temporary Restraining Order/Temporary Injunction in Iowa

Understanding the Purpose and Significance of a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order/Temporary Injunction

“A temporary injunction is a preventive remedy to maintain the status quo of the parties prior to final judgment and to protect the subject of the litigation.” (See League of United Latin Am. Citizens v. Iowa Sec'y of State Paul Pate (2020) 950 N.W.2d 204, 221.)

“One requirement for the issuance of a temporary injunction is a showing of the likelihood or probability of success on the merits of the underlying claim." (See Lewis Invs., Inc. v. City of Iowa City (2005) 703 N.W.2d 180, 184; Shelton v. State (2018) 919 N.W.2d 635.)

Rules for Filing a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order/Temporary Injunction

Rules 1.1501 – 1.1512 of the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure governs injunctions.

“A temporary injunction may be allowed under any of the following circumstances:

When the petition, supported by affidavit, shows the plaintiff is entitled to relief which includes restraining the commission or continuance of some act which would greatly or irreparably injure the plaintiff.

Where, during the litigation, it appears that a party is doing, procuring or suffering to be done, or threatens or is about to do, an act violating the other party's right respecting the subject of the action and tending to make the judgment ineffectual.

In any case specially authorized by statute.”

(See Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.1502(1), (2), (3).)

“A party against whom a temporary injunction is issued without notice may, at any time, move the court where the action is pending to dissolve, vacate or modify it. Such motion shall be submitted to that court. A hearing shall be held within ten days after the filing of the motion.” (See Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.1509.)

Discretion of the Court in Deciding a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order/Temporary Injunction

“Because the question of whether to issue a temporary injunction rests within the discretion of the district court, we review the denial for an abuse of discretion.” (See Covington v. Reynolds ex rel. State (2020) 949 N.W.2d 663; Lewis Investments, Inc. v. City of Iowa City (2005) 703 N.W.2d 180, 184.)

"A district court abuses its discretion when the grounds underlying a district court order are clearly untenable or unreasonable." (See Fenceroy v. Gelita USA, Inc. (2018) 908 N.W.2d 235, 241; Sioux Pharm, Inc. v. Eagle Labs., Inc. (2015) 865 N.W.2d 528, 535; Mediacom Iowa, L.L.C. v. Inc. City of Spencer (2004) 682 N.W.2d 62, 66.)

Legal Precedents and Case Law on a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order/Temporary Injunction

It is well settled that “where the litigant’s underlying claim is an equitable action seeking permanent injunctive relief, the district court must assess the likelihood that the [party] would be successful in showing entitlement to a permanent injunction in determining whether a request for a temporary injunction should be granted.” (See Shelton v. State (2018) 919 N.W.2d 635.)

It is also well settled that “pursuant to rule 1.1506(1), a temporary injunction may be granted by ...[a] judge of the district in which the action is or will be pending. Because the question of whether a temporary injunction should be issued or rejected depends upon the unique facts of each case…” (See id.)