§ 1.1.1 Types of Injunctions.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 1.1.1 Types of Injunctions. An injunction is a decree in equity. State ex rel. Corbin v. Portland Cement Ass’n, 142 Ariz. 421, 690 P.2d 140 (Ct. App. 1984). There is no independent cause of action for an injunction; rather, an injunction is a “remedy for an underlying cause of action, not a separate cause of action in and of itself.” Diaz-Amador v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc., 856 F. Supp. 2d 1074, 1083 (D. Ariz. 2012) .

“An injunction may serve to undo accomplished wrongs, or to prevent future wrongs that are likely to occur.” T.P. Racing, LLP v. Simms, 232 Ariz. 489, 495, 307 P.3d 56, 62 (Ct. App. 2013) . Injunctions are divided into two major types. An injunction restraining a person from doing a particular act is a prohibitory or negative injunction. “A mandatory injunction, in contrast, is said to alter the status quo by commanding some positive act.” Tom Doherty Associates, Inc. v. Saban Entertainment, Inc., 60 F.3d 27, 34 (2d Cir. 1995) . For example, “[a]n order compelling disclosure of an anonymous party’s identity is essentially a mandatory injunction; both such orders alter the status quo.” Mobilisa, Inc. v. Doe, 217 Ariz. 103, 112, 170 P.2d 712, 721 (Ct. App. 2007) . A mandatory injunction is sometimes also referred to as a reparative injunction.

Because a court may issue a mandatory injunction by restraining a party from failing to do a particular act, the two types are often difficult to distinguish. See Belknap v. Leary, 427 F.2d 496 (2d Cir. 1970) ; United Railroads v. Superior Court, 172 Cal. 80, 155 P. 463 (1916). For instance, in Cracchiolo v. State, 135 Ariz. 243, 660 P.2d 494 (Ct. App. 1983) , the Arizona Court of Appeals held that an injunction may issue with regard to a completed act. “A mandatory injunction can direct that an accomplished fact be undone.” Id. at 246, 660 P.2d at 497 .

The situation is further confused where, in order to comply with a prohibitory injunction, a defendant must do some initial act to facilitate compliance. For example, an injunction might restrain the use of a particular trade name on defendant’s business trucks. This injunction is clearly prohibitory even though to comply the defendant must do some affirmative act to remove the infringing name from his trucks. Jaynes v. Weickman, 51 Cal. App. 696, 197 P. 672 (Ct. App. 1921) . Conversely, an injunction restricting use of a building to a single-family dwelling is mandatory where the defendant must dispossess his tenants and remodel the building...