EVANS
v.
ROZAS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Rickey Lamar Evans, Jr., a pretrial detainee at Hillsborough County Jail, filed a civil rights complaint and moved for a temporary restraining order seeking protection from anticipated retaliation by defendants and relocation from the jail. The court denied the motion, finding Evans failed to meet the legal standards required for extraordinary injunctive relief.
The court denied Evans' motion for a temporary restraining order without prejudice. Evans failed to satisfy the four-part test for injunctive relief and failed to demonstrate irreparable injury based on concrete facts rather than speculation.
[1] A party seeking a temporary restraining order must demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable injury if the injunction is not granted, tha…
[2] Temporary injunctive relief may be granted without notice only if specific facts show immediate and irreparable injury before the adverse party can be heard, and the mova…
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEvans is a Florida pretrial detainee who filed a civil rights action against Marrissa K. Rozas and others. He moved for a temporary restraining order …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Real And Immediate Threat Of Future Injury cases and more on FLexlaw
Evans, a Florida pretrial detainee who initiated this action by filing a civil rights complaint, moves for a temporary restraining order (Doc. 5). Evans asserts that he fears when Defendants are served with his complaint, they will retaliate against him or harass him. Evans appears to seek an order directing Defendants to move him out of the Hillsborough County Jail.
Evans has not shown he is entitled to a temporary restraining order. A court's issuance of a temporary restraining order is an extraordinary remedy. See United States v. Lambert, 695 F. 2d 536 (11th Cir. 1983). A party seeking a temporary restraining order must show: 1) a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, 2) irreparable injury if the injunction is not granted, 3) that the threatened injury outweighs the harm the relief would inflict on the nonmovant, and 4) that the entry of relief would serve the public interest. Schiavo ex rel. Schindler v. Schiavo, 403 F. 3d 1223, 1225-26 (11th Cir. 2005). Further, a court may grant temporary injunctive relief without notice to the adverse party only if:
(A) specific facts in an affidavit or a verified complaint clearly show that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the movant before the adverse party can be heard in opposition; and (B) the movant[ ] ... certifies in writing any efforts made to give notice and the reasons why it should not be required. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1).
Evans has not satisfied these standards, nor has he complied with the requirements of Local Rule 6.01 (M.D. Fla.) governing the procedure for seeking the imposition of a temporary restraining order in this district. Moreover, his motion fails on the merits because he has not shown that injunctive relief is necessary to prevent irreparable injury, as he has offered only speculation of future harm. See Church v. City of Huntsville, 30 F. 3d 1332, 1337 (11th Cir.1994) (To obtain injunctive relief, a plaintiff must show “a real and immediate—as opposed to a merely conjectural or hypothetical-threat of future injury.") (emphasis in original).
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that Evans' motion for a temporary injunction (Doc. 5) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on January 19, 2024.
Charlene Edwards Honeywell Charlene Edwards Honeywell United States District Judge
Copy to: Plaintiff, pro se
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Schiavo v. Schiavo, 403 F.3d 1223 (11th Cir. 2005)
- Joe Church v. City OF Huntsville, 30 F.3d 1332 (11th Cir. 1994)
- United States v. Lambert, 695 F.2d 536 (11th Cir. 1983)