Shakima P. Kelly v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Delaware denied pro se Plaintiff Shakima P. Kelly's emergency motions for a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, and immediate release of a vehicle and personal property. The court found that Defendant had not been served, Plaintiff had not satisfied the notice-certification requirements for emergency relief, and the pleadings did not establish likely success on the merits or that an injunction would serve the public interest.

Holdings

1. A temporary restraining order without notice was unavailable because the record did not show that plaintiff supplied the required certification of efforts to give notice or reasons why notice should not be required, and the record did not establish the required factual basis for immediate and irreparable injury.
2. Plaintiff was not entitled to a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order because she failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits and that granting relief would serve the public interest.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff was entitled to a temporary restraining order without notice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1).
2. Whether plaintiff was entitled to a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order under the applicable four-factor injunction standard.
3. Whether plaintiff's emergency motion for immediate release of her vehicle and personal property should be granted.

Disposition

other