Issue: Under Illinois law, what must the proponent of a temporary restraining order establish in order to obtain relief?
|Area of Law:||Family Law, Litigation Practice & Procedure, Litigation Practice and Procedure, Uncategorized|
|Keywords:||; Temporary; Restraining Order; Remedy; Establish; Injunctive; Relief; Allegations|
|Cited Cases:||849 A.2d 451|
The elements an applicant must establish to warrant the extraordinary remedy of a temporary restraining order are well-established. As variously stated, the movant must demonstrate (1) an ascertainable right in need of protection, (2) a likelihood of success on the merits, (3) irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief, and (4) the lack of an adequate remedy at law. Mohanty, 225 Ill.2d at 62, citing People ex rel. Klaeren v. Village of Lisle, 202 Ill.2d 164, 177 (2002) and Callis, Papa, Jackstadt & Halloran, P.C. v. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co., 195 Ill.2d 356, 365 (2001). In addition, if the movant establishes a prima facie case, a court may also consider whether the balance of harms favors the grant or denial of injunctive relief. Lumbermen’s Mutual Casualty Co. v. Sykes, 384 Ill.App.3d 207, 230 (2008).
Broad, conclusory allegations are insufficient to establish a plaintiff’s entitlement to temporary injunctive relief. See Capstone Financial Advisors, Inc. v. Plywaczynski, 2015 IL App. (2d) 150957, ¶ 11 (plaintiff’s failure to identify single client whom defendant solicited, or whose confidential information defendant used, fatal to motion for TRO); Office Electronics, Inc. v. Adell, 228 Ill.App.3d 814, 820 (1992) (conclusory allegations regarding plaintiff’s irreparable injury and lack of adequate legal remedy do not support issuance of preliminary injunction); Schlicksup Drug Co. v. Schlicksup, 129 Ill.App.2d 181, 188 (1970) (finding allegation that defendant’s conduct had and "will continue to cause irreparable injury to the plaintiff for which the plaintiff has no adequate remedy at […]