Section 12.7 Appealability of Grant or Denial of Injunctive Relief

• Library: App Ct Prac 2015 Supp

1. (§12.7) Appealability of Grant or Denial of Injunctive Relief

As a general rule, United States courts of appeals have jurisdiction over appeals from “[i]nterlocutory orders of the district courts of the United States . . . granting, continuing, modifying, refusing or dissolving injunctions, or refusing to dissolve or modify injunctions, except where a direct review may be had in the Supreme Court.” 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). “The exception [embodied in 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1)] is a narrow one and is keyed to the ‘need to permit litigants to effectually challenge interlocutory orders of serious, perhaps irreparable, consequence.’” Gardner v. Westinghouse Broad. Co., 437 U.S. 478, 480 (1978) (quoting Baltimore Contractors, Inc. v. Bodinger, 348 U.S. 176, 181 (1955)).

Thus, an order granting a preliminary injunction, although clearly interlocutory, may be immediately appealable in the federal system under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a). And a temporary restraining order, although not normally considered “injunctive” relief, may become appealable if it is extended beyond the normal ten-day period or otherwise threatens irreparable harm. See Sampson v. Murray, 415 U.S. 61, 86 (1974); see also Nordin v. Nutri/Sys., Inc., 897 F.2d 339, 343 (8^th Cir. 1990). Even a denial of injunctive relief is generally appealable in the federal system. 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1); Manion v. Nagin, 255 F.3d 535, 538 (8^th Cir. 2001); Holmes v. Fisher, 854 F.2d 229, 231–32 (7^th Cir. 1988). Thus, appeals in injunction cases are much more readily available in the federal system than in Missouri. Compare § 512.020, RSMo 2000 (allowing interlocutory appeal in injunctive matters only from an order dissolving an injunction).

The United States Supreme Court has held that neither 28 U.S.C. § 1291 nor 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) confers appellate jurisdiction to consider a district court’s denial of a motion to...