Chapter § 10-2 Obtaining a Temporary Restraining Order and Injunctive Relief

• Jurisdiction: United States

10-2 Obtaining a Temporary Restraining Order and Injunctive Relief

A party seeking a temporary restraining order or a temporary injunction must show: (1) a claim for permanent relief against the defendant; (2) a probable right to the relief sought; and (3) a probable, imminent, and irreparable injury in the interim.

• Butnaru v. Ford Motor Co., 84 S.W.3d 198, 204 (Tex. 2002); Walling v. Metcalf, 863 S.W.2d 56, 57 (Tex. 1993); El Tacaso, Inc. v. Jireh Star, Inc., 356 S.W.3d 740, 743 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011, no pet.).

10-2:1 A Cause of Action Against the Defendant

First, you must include a request for some sort of permanent relief. This can be satisfied by seeking a permanent injunction and/or pleading a claim for money damages, such as breach of contract. Do not oversell your claim for money damages. Also, carefully consider how you plead the maximum amount of monetary damages and make sure to repeatedly state that your primary relief sought is injunctive relief for damages that cannot be ascertained.

10-2:2 Probable Right to Relief/Likelihood of Success on the Merits

In its simplest terms, this factor requires a showing that the noncompete is enforceable, both as to whether the company has a protectable interest for which there needs to be a noncompete and to whether the restrictions themselves are reasonable (geographic limitation, temporal duration, and scope).

Basic Rule: If your agreement is overly broad as written, plead reformation and only seek injunctive relief that is "reasonable." See Brink's Inc v. Patrick, No. 3:14-CV-775-B, 2014 WL 2931824 (N.D. Tex. June 27, 2014) (noting that agreement was overly broad, but that the preliminary injunction only sought to prevent the departing employee from performing similar services in the same territory). If you do not, then your request for injunctive relief will be denied or, if initially granted, dissolved.

10-2:3 Imminent Harm and Irreparable Injury

There are three main points to imminent harm and irreparable injury. First, evidence of mere breach of a noncompete alone is not sufficient.

• Brink's Inc. v. Patrick, No. 3:14-CV-775-B, 2014 WL 2931824 (N.D. Tex. June 27, 2014) (irreparable injury will not be presumed merely because a noncompete is being violated).

Second, imminent harm and irreparable injury is now easier than ever to establish.

• Tranter, Inc. v. Liss, No. 02-13-00167-CV, 2014 WL 1257278 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Mar. 27, 2014, no pet.) (employee acknowledgment that his new job was very

...