Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Citation
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Parent Document
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Jurisdiction
- United States (federal)
- Effective Date
- 2018-03-01
Other Sections in This Document (36)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
- Mary Valencia v. City of Springfield, 883 F.3d 959 (2018)
Full Text
1,799 charsII. Discussion
A. The Preliminary Injunction Standard
“An equitable, interlocutory form of relief, ‘a preliminary
injunction is an exercise of a very far-reaching power, never
to be indulged in except in a case clearly demanding it.’” Girl
Scouts of Manitou Council, Inc. v. Girl Scouts of United States of
Am., Inc., 549 F.3d 1079, 1085 (7th Cir. 2008) (quoting Roland
Mach. Co. v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 749 F.2d 380, 389 (7th Cir.
1984)); see also Whitaker v. Kenosha Unified Sch. Dist. No. 1 Bd.
of Educ., 858 F.3d 1034, 1044 (7th Cir. 2017) (“A preliminary
injunction is an extraordinary remedy.”). “It is never awarded
as a matter of right.” Whitaker, 858 F.3d at 1044. “To determine
whether a situation warrants such a remedy, a district court
engages in an analysis that proceeds in two distinct phases: a
threshold phase and a balancing phase.” Girl Scouts, 549 F.3d
at 1085–86.
“To survive the threshold phase, a party seeking a prelim-
inary injunction must satisfy three requirements.” Id. at 1086.
It must show that: (1) “absent a preliminary injunction, it will
suffer irreparable harm in the interim period prior to final res-
olution of its claims”; (2) “traditional legal remedies would be
inadequate”; and (3) “its claim has some likelihood of suc-
ceeding on the merits.” Id.
If the moving party satisfies each of these requirements,
the court “proceeds to the balancing phase of the analysis.”
Id. In the balancing phase, “the court weighs the irreparable
harm that the moving party would endure without the pro-
tection of the preliminary injunction against any irreparable
harm the nonmoving party would suffer if the court were to
grant the requested relief.” Id. “In so doing, the court employs
10 No. 17-2773