Grounds for TRO/Injunction

Injunctive relief may be based on the application of general equitable principles or on express authorization contained in a statute. In all actions for injunctive relief, the traditional principles, practices, and procedures governing courts of equity are controlling as long they are not in conflict with Texas statutes or rules of procedure.

A general statutory provision regarding injunctions is found in Chapter 65 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Section 65.011 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code provides that a writ of injunction may be granted in any of the following situations:

1. The applicant is entitled to the relief demanded and all or part of the relief requires the restraint of some act prejudicial to the applicant. This section of the statute does not relieve the applicant of the equitable requirements of showing irreparable injury and lack of an adequate legal remedy.

2. A party performs or is about to perform or is procuring or allowing the performance of an act relating to the subject of pending litigation, in violation of the rights of the applicant, and the act would tend to render the judgment in that litigation ineffectual.

3. The applicant is entitled to a writ of injunction under the principles of equity and the statutes relating to injunctions.

4. A cloud would be placed on the title of real property being sold under an execution against a party having no interest in the real property subject to execution at the time of sale, irrespective of any remedy at law.

5. Irreparable injury to real or personal property is threatened irrespective of any remedy at law.

Injunctive relief is also authorized by the express provisions of various statutes. For example, one statute provides that a person may bring an action to enjoin an act likely to injure a business reputation or to dilute the value of a registered trademark or of a common-law trademark or trade name. Express statutory requirements supersede equitable requirements applicable to common-law injunctions. Accordingly, if a statute specifically authorizes the remedy of injunction, a showing of the absence of an adequate remedy at law is not necessarily required. The express terms of the statute may also limit the relief available. Thus, when an action to enjoin a nuisance is brought under statutory authority, only those activities listed in the statute may be enjoined.

The plaintiff is not relieved of the necessity of showing the equitable requirements merely because the defendant allegedly violated a statute. If a request to enjoin a statutory violation is not based on a statutory right to an injunction but on equitable principles, equitable requirements must be met.