Shane A. Wiley v. Thirty5 West New LP LLC, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma denied Shane A. Wiley’s motion to reconsider the denial of a temporary restraining order and denied related requests for an emergency hearing and expedited review. The court held that Wiley had not sufficiently complied with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65’s notice requirements and had not shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. The court also noted that ongoing or completed state eviction proceedings could implicate Younger abstention or the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.

Holdings

1. Plaintiff was not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief because she did not sufficiently comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65's notice requirements.
2. Plaintiff was not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief because she failed to demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits.
3. Because a state-court forcible-entry-and-detainer proceeding appeared to be ongoing or, alternatively, could have concluded, Plaintiff's requested federal injunctive relief was likely subject to Younger abstention or the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff was entitled to reconsideration of the prior denial of a temporary restraining order without notice.
2. Whether Plaintiff satisfied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65's notice and certification requirements for preliminary injunctive relief.
3. Whether Plaintiff demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of her claims challenging Defendants' authority to collect rent or seek eviction.
4. Whether ongoing or completed state-court eviction proceedings likely deprived the federal court of jurisdiction under Younger abstention or the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.

Disposition

other