Commission vs City of Mounds View Ramsey Court

Home Browse Search

"A temporary injunction may be granted if by affidavit, deposition testimony, or oral testimony in court, it appears that sufficient grounds exist therefor." Minn. R.Civ.P. 65.02 (b). The proper analysis for determining whether to grant a temporary injunction is found in Dahlberg Bros. v. Ford Motor Co., 272 Minn. 264, 137 N.W.2d 314, 321-322 (Minn. 1965). Five factors are to be considered by the Court: 1. The nature and background of the relationship between the parties; 2. The harm to be suffered by plaintiff if the temporary injunctive relief is denied as compared to the harm inflicted on defendant if the injunction issues pending trial; 3. The likelihood that one party or the other will prevail on the merits; 4. The public policy/public interest; and 5. The administrative burdens involved in judicial supervision and enforcement of the temporary injunction. Id. 1. The nature of the relationship between the parties does support a temporary injunction. "A temporary injunction is an extraordinary equitable remedy...[which] purpose is to preserve the status quo until adjudication of the case on its merits." Miller v. Foley, 317 N.W.2d 710, 712 (Minn. 1982). Plaintiffs in this action are residents of the City of Mounds View and also are members of the Mounds View Charter Commission. Plaintiffs have participated in the governmental process in Mounds View, as members of the Charter Commission, and have performed their duties accordingly to case and statutory law. Defendant is the City of Mounds View, by and through Mayor Dan Coughlin and the members of the City Council. Under Minn. Stat. Section 410.12 Subd. 5, the City Council may propose amendments to a home rule charter to the voters by ordinance. Any ordinance proposing such an amendment shall be submitted to the Charter Commission, who shall review the proposed amendment within 60 days thereafter. Before the expiration Memorandum Page 2 of 6