Andrew Isaacs v. Christopher B. Wigand et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida directed Plaintiff Andrew Isaacs to file a procedurally compliant motion if he seeks a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction concerning state-court child-support contempt proceedings. The Court explained that an ex parte TRO requires compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1), while a preliminary injunction requires notice under Rule 65(a)(1) and evidentiary support. Plaintiff was ordered to file any such motion, including a memorandum of law, by December 2, 2025.

Holdings

1. A TRO without notice may not issue unless the movant provides specific facts in an affidavit or verified complaint clearly showing that immediate and irreparable injury will occur before the adverse party can be heard, and certifies in writing efforts to provide notice and the reasons notice should not be required.
2. A preliminary injunction may issue only on notice to the adverse party and cannot be granted solely on naked allegations.
3. A pro se litigant must comply with applicable procedural rules and is not excused from the requirements governing emergency injunctive relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an unverified complaint containing allegations of imminent incarceration could support a temporary restraining order without notice.
2. Whether Plaintiff's complaint could support a preliminary injunction without notice to all adverse parties and without a motion supported by evidence and legal analysis.
3. What procedural requirements Plaintiff must satisfy if he later seeks emergency injunctive relief.

Disposition

other