Fung-Schwartz v. Cerner Corp.

Summary

The Second Circuit vacated a district court order denying a motion for a preliminary injunction and TRO because the written order conflicted with oral statements that appeared to grant the relief. The court held that any grant of preliminary relief must be supported by specific factual and legal findings and must specify the precise scope and duration of the injunction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)(1). The case was remanded for the district court to clarify its ruling and provide the necessary justification.

Holdings

1. The district court's order was ambiguous and inconsistent, requiring vacatur and remand for clarification.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court's order denying injunctive relief was clear and consistent with its oral statements.

Disposition

vacated_and_remanded