Andreyev v. Trotsiouk

Summary

The United States Magistrate Judge recommends denying Galina V. Andreyev’s motion for a temporary restraining order seeking immediate access to her elderly mother. The recommendation concludes that the motion failed to satisfy the notice and proposed-order requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1) and Eastern District of California Local Rule 231. The parties were advised that objections may be filed within 14 days.

Holdings

1. A temporary restraining order without notice may not issue when the movant does not provide notice to the affected parties, make reasonable efforts to provide notice, or explain why notice should not be required as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)(B).
2. Failure to comply with the local rule governing temporary restraining orders, including the requirements to provide notice and submit required proposed orders and supporting documents, independently justified denial of the motion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order could be granted when she failed to provide notice to the affected parties or explain why notice should not be required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1)(B).
2. Whether Plaintiff's failure to submit documents required by Eastern District of California Local Rule 231 warranted denial of the temporary restraining order.

Disposition

other