Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

352 So. 2d 303

Johnson v. Lee

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided November 10, 1977

Louisiana Court of Appeal · decided 1977-11-10

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently April 1997

3 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“[Ijnjunctive relief is not available as a remedy unless the petitioner shows that he will suffer irreparable injury if such relief is not granted.... Irreparable injury is considered to be a loss sustained by an injured party which cannot be adequately compensated in money damages or for which such damages cannot be measured by a pecuniary standard.... The jurisprudence requires the applicant for injunctive relief to make a prima facie showing that he wil prevail on the merits of the case.... The question of whether the preliminary injunction should be granted or denied is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, or trier of fact_ Its decision will be disturbed on review only in cases where a clear abuse of discretion has been shown.... (citations omitted)”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Head & Engquist Equipment, Inc. v. Ryland

Relies on Greenberg v. Burglass · 290 So. 2d 312 - Schwegmann Bros. GS Mkts. v. Louisiana Milk Com'n · 254 So. 2d 643 - West Publishing Co. v. Intrastate Pipeline Corp.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1977-11-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

SAMUEL, Judge.

¶1Plaintiff, a certified public accountant, instituted this suit for $750 for professional services rendered to the defendant. He obtained a default judgment for that amount. After the delay for taking an appeal had expired, defendant filed a petition seeking nullity of the judgment and injunctive relief preventing its execution.

¶2Following a hearing of the rule to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not be issued, there was judgment refusing to issue the preliminary injunction. Defendant has suspensively appealed from that judgment. The trial court has heard only the rule for a preliminary injunction.

¶3Our courts will extend injunctive relief only when irreparable injury is imminent1 and, in order for a preliminary injunction to issue, the one seeking such an injunction must make a prima facie showing that he would suffer irreparable injury if the same is not granted.2 In addition, “irreparable injury” such as will warrant the issuance of an injunction is that injury, loss or damage for which damages cannot be measured by a pecuniary standard.3

¶4Here, the evidence offered at the trial of the rule was concerned mainly, and almost exclusively, with the merits of the suit to annul and, as those merits will be heard by the trial court at a later date, we prefer not to discuss or comment upon the same. It suffices to say we agree with the trial court’s conclusion that appellant failed to make the prima facie showing required for issuance of the preliminary injunction he seeks. This is particularly true in view of the fact that the record is devoid of any evidence showing any possible loss or damage to appellant other than satisfaction of the $750 judgment, which amount he admits he is quite capable of paying.

¶5For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from is affirmed and the matter is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with law.

¶6AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.

¶7. Greenberg v. DeSalvo, 254 La. 1019, 229 So.2d 83; State Board of Ed. v. National Collegiate Ath. Ass’n, La.App., 273 So.2d 912.

¶8. Schwegmann Bros. G. S. Mkts. v. Louisiana Milk Com’n., La., 290 So.2d 312; West Publishing Co. v. Intrastate Pipeline Corp., La.App., 254 So.2d 643.

¶9. State Board of Ed. v. National Collegiate Ath. Ass’n, supra, note 1.

/352/so2d/303 · .json · Public domain