Jayaraj v. Scappini

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• vacating preliminary injunction based on “evidence of speculative and attenuated injuries” which “shifted the burden of proof to the non-moving party to show that under no circumstances would a later fact-finder award inadequate monetary damages.”
• “[W]here monetary damages may provide adequate compensation, a preliminary injunction should not [be] issue[d]. Furthermore, the harm must be imminent or certain, not merely speculative.” (internal citation omitted)
• “[I]rreparable harm is measured in terms of the harm arising during the interim between the request for an injunction and final disposition of the case on the merits[.]”
• “Because we hold that [the plaintiff] failed to establish that he would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction, there is no need to reach the second portion of the preliminary injunction analysis.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).