Owens v. Zumwalt

6 Citing cases

  1. Get Bak'd OKC, LLC v. Releaf Labs, LLC

    540 P.3d 1117 (Okla. Civ. App. 2023)

    To obtain a preliminary injunction, the plaintiffs must show that four factors weigh in their favor: (1) the likelihood of success on the merits; (2) irreparable harm to the parties seeking injunctive relief if the injunction is denied; (3) their threatened injuries outweigh the injury the opposing party will suffer under the injunction; and (4) the injunction is in the public interest. Owens v. Zumwalt , 2022 OK 14, ¶ 8, 503 P.3d 1211, 1214. Although " ‘the burden of proof is less stringent than required in proceedings on the merits,’ a right to this equitable remedy ‘must be established by clear and convincing evidence and the nature of the injury must not be nominal, theoretical or speculative.’

  2. The Okla. Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church v. Timmons

    2023 OK 101 (Okla. 2023)   Cited 4 times
    Concluding that because "the Book of Discipline is a governing church document, its interpretation is an ecclesiastical issue"

    Nichols, 2022 OK 76, ¶ 11, 518 P.3d at 887. A mandatory injunction, rather than preserving the status quo, "is an extraordinary remedial process that commands the performance of some positive act." Owens v. Zumwalt, 2022 OK 14, ¶ 7, 503 P.3d 1211, 1214.

  3. The Okla. Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church v. Timmons

    2023 OK 102 (Okla. 2023)   Cited 2 times

    Nichols, 2022 OK 76, ¶ 11, 518 P.3d at 887. A mandatory injunction, rather than preserving the status quo, "is an extraordinary remedial process that commands the performance of some positive act." Owens v. Zumwalt, 2022 OK 14, ¶ 7, 503 P.3d 1211, 1214.

  4. W. Heights Indep. Sch. Dist. v. The State ex rel., Okla. State Dep't of Educ

    2022 OK 79 (Okla. 2022)   Cited 7 times

    Jennings v. Elliott, 1939 OK 554, 97 P.2d 67, 70 ("The only office of a restraining order is to restrain the party against whom it is issued pending a hearing for a temporary injunction. It is merely an order intended to preserve the present status until a hearing may be had upon a pending application for a temporary injunction...."); 12 O.S.2011 § 1384.1 (D) ("When the motion comes on for hearing the party who obtained the temporary restraining order shall proceed with the application for a temporary injunction and, if the party does not do so, the court shall dissolve the temporary restraining order."); Owens v. Zumwalt, 2022 OK 14, ¶ 7, 503 P.3d 1211, 1214 ("A preliminary injunction preserves the status quo until there can be a final determination of the controversy.").

  5. Latigo Oil & Gas, Inc. v. BP Am. Prod. Co.

    2024 OK 35 (Okla. 2024)

    ¶14 We review the granting of a preliminary injunction for an abuse of discretion. Owens v. Zumwalt, 2022 OK 14, ¶ 6, 503 P.3d 1211, 1214. We have found an abuse of discretion "occurs when a decision is clearly against the weight of the evidence, contrary to law, or contrary to established principles of equity." Id.

  6. Pike Off OTA, Inc. v. Okla. Tpk. Auth.

    2023 OK 57 (Okla. 2023)   Cited 1 times

    Instead, Appellants seek a mandatory injunction, which is an "extraordinary remedial process that commands the performance of some positive act." See Owens v. Zumwalt, 2022 OK 14, ¶ 8, 503 P.3d 1211, 1214. The rules regarding injunctions are more strictly construed when applied to mandatory injunctions.