Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Richard and Sharon Norlund v. Bogman

February 14, 2012

RICHARD AND SHARON NORLUND,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
BOGMAN, INC.; JOHN TOWNSEND; LAW OFFICES OF LES ZIEVE; LEZ ZIEVE; JOSHUA ABEL; QAND CHRISTINE O'BRIEN,
DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge

ORDER

Plaintiffs, proceeding in propria persona, filed a request for a temporary restraining order ("TRO") today, just two and one half hours before their real property is scheduled to be auctioned. However, Plaintiffs' conclusory assertions do not demonstrate they have a probability of succeeding on the merits of their claims, or that equity favors preventing the harm about which they complain. A & M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004, 1013 (9th Cir.2001) (discussing injunction standard).

Further, under the applicable local rule on injunctions, "[s]hould the Court find that the applicant unduly delayed in seeking injunctive relief, the Court may conclude that the delay [in seeking a TRO] contradicts the applicant's allegations of irreparable injury and may deny the motion solely on [that] ground." L.R. 65-231 (b). Here, Plaintiffs TRO motion indicates Plaintiffs have know for several months they were behind on their mortgage payments and that a Notice of Default issued. Yet, Plaintiffs have not explained why they waited until now to seek injunctive relief. Since Plaintiffs have not adequately explained why they have delayed seeking a TRO, the motion is denied on this ground.

Further, even though the loss of a home may constitute irreparable harm, Plaintiffs have not sufficiently explained the factual context concerning why their home is scheduled to be sold, which should include an explanation justifying finding that they will suffer irreparable harm if their home is sold. Absence this explanation, the record is devoid of facts showing Plaintiffs' own actions are not the cause of their predicament, and that the equities at issue tip in their favor.

Therefore, Plaintiffs' request for a TRO is denied.

20120214

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.