Court Opinion

ID: 9596924
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:54:08.671125+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:43:02.684853
License: Public Domain

Munson, J.
(concurring) — I concur in the result. I do not believe we need reach the issues presented by Sniadach v. Family Fin. Corp., 395 U.S. 337, 23 L. Ed. 2d 349, 89 S. Ct. 1820 (1969), Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67, 32 L. Ed. 2d 556, 92 S. Ct. 1983 (1972) or Lucas v. Stapp, 6 Wn. App. 971, 497 P.2d 250 (1972). Plaintiff did not.comply with either RCW 7.40.050 or CR 65 (b) in seeking a temporary restraining order. Merely alleging “irreparable damage” in a complaint is an insufficient explanation of an “emergency” to warrant the granting of a restraining order, temporary or otherwise. Nothing more appears, neither in the body of the complaint nor by affidavit accompanying the motion, to.support such an order. This deficiency alone is sufficient to warrant reversal.
Green, C.J., concurs with Munson, J.