California
Appeals
Standard of Review
Preliminary Injunction
 

Standard of Review order granting a preliminary injunction-City of Corona v. Naulls


 

A.         Standard of review.

“We review an order granting a preliminary injunction, under an abuse of discretion standard, to determine whether the trial court abused its discretion in evaluating the two interrelated factors pertinent to issuance of a preliminary injunction—(1) the likelihood that the plaintiffs will prevail on the merits at trial, and (2) the interim harm that the plaintiffs are likely to sustain if the injunction were denied as compared to the harm the defendant is likely to suffer if the preliminary injunction were issued.  [Citation.]  Abuse of discretion as to either factor warrants reversal.  [Citation.]”  (Alliant Ins. Services, Inc. v. Gaddy (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 1292, 1300 (Alliant).)

“‘In determining the validity of the injunction, we look at the evidence presented to the trial court to determine if there was substantial support for the trial court’s determination that the plaintiff was entitled to the relief granted.’  [Citation.]  ‘Where the evidence before the trial court was in conflict, we do not reweigh it or determine the credibility of witnesses on appeal.  “[T]he trial court is the judge of the credibility of the affidavits filed in support of the application for preliminary injunction and it is that court’s province to resolve conflicts.”  [Citation.]  Our task is to ensure that the trial court’s factual determinations, whether express or implied, are supported by substantial evidence.  [Citation.]  Thus, we interpret the facts in the light most favorable to the prevailing party and indulge in all reasonable inferences in support of the trial court’s order.  [Citations.]’  [Citation.]”  (Alliant, supra, 159 Cal.App.4th at p. 1300.)

eBook Master Table of Contents   
Standard of Review-Table of Contents
Briefs-Legal Argument-Table of Contents