Summary
The Supreme Court of Ohio held that a municipality may immediately appeal an order preliminarily enjoining enforcement of its duly enacted ordinances under R.C. 2505.02(B)(4). The court concluded that such an injunction satisfies both statutory conditions because it determines the provisional remedy and causes irreparable harm to the municipality’s sovereign interest in enforcing its laws. The court reversed the Fifth District Court of Appeals’ dismissal and remanded for consideration of the merits of the city’s appeal.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a preliminary injunction barring a municipality from enforcing duly enacted ordinances is a provisional-remedy order that satisfies R.C. 2505.02(B)(4)(a).
- Whether the municipality would lack a meaningful or effective remedy after final judgment, satisfying R.C. 2505.02(B)(4)(b), when enforcement of its ordinances has been preliminarily enjoined.
- Whether the City of Columbus could immediately appeal the preliminary injunction.
Holdings
- A preliminary injunction is a provisional remedy, and an order granting one is a final, appealable order when the requirements of R.C. 2505.02(B)(4) are met.
- A municipality suffers irreparable injury to its sovereign interest when a court facially enjoins enforcement of a duly enacted ordinance, so an appeal after final judgment would not provide a meaningful or effective remedy.
- The City of Columbus may immediately appeal the trial court's preliminary injunction under R.C. 2505.02(B)(4).
Key quotations
“The State and its municipalities have a sovereign interest in passing and enforcing their duly enacted laws, and a court’s order enjoining the operation of such laws causes irreparable injury to that sovereign interest.” (¶ 2)
“Accordingly, we conclude that there is an immediate right of review when a lower court facially enjoins the enforcement of a duly enacted law.” (¶ 29)
Factual background
Columbus enacted two ordinances regulating firearm magazine capacity and firearm storage around minors. The Does challenged portions of the ordinances under Ohio's firearm-regulation preemption statute and the Ohio Constitution. The Delaware County Court of Common Pleas issued a preliminary injunction barring the city from enforcing specified provisions, and the city sought an immediate appeal.
Procedural history
The Does sued the City of Columbus and related officials, alleging that portions of two firearm ordinances violated Ohio's firearm-regulation preemption statute and the Ohio Constitution. The trial court granted a preliminary injunction. The Fifth District dismissed the city's interlocutory appeal, concluding that the injunction was not immediately appealable. The Supreme Court of Ohio reversed and remanded for the Fifth District to reach the merits of the city's appeal.
Remand instructions
The Fifth District Court of Appeals must address the merits of the city's appeal.