Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Prac., Civil Practice Forms S 23.1 (2d ed. 2005). Each of the factors, as well as additional <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />requirements imposed by Rule 23.02, must be found before a case may be certified to proceed as <br /> <br />a class action. Id. Look has not even alleged that he has met the requirements for class action <br /> <br />certification. Accordingly, for purposes of his motion for a temporary injunction, Look must be <br /> <br />viewed as the sole plaintiff. <br /> <br />B. STANl)ARDS FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION AND SUMMARY <br />JUDGMENT' <br /> <br />1. A Temporary Injunction is an Extraordinary Remedy and Plaintiff <br />Has the Burden of Establishing Necessity <br /> <br />'''A temporary injunction is an extraordinary equitable remedy." Miller v. Foley, 317 <br /> <br />N.W.2d 710, 712 (Minn. 1982) (reversing district court's grant of temporary injunction) <br /> <br />(emphasis added). <br /> <br />"[T]he factors which the trial court is to consider in determining whether to grant <br />preliminary injunctive relief are: <br /> <br />(1) the nature of the relationship between the parties before the dispute <br />giving rise to the request for relief; <br /> <br />(2). the harm to be suffered by the moving party if the preliminary <br />injunction is denied as comparedto that inflicted on the non-moving party <br />if the injunction issues pending trial; <br /> <br />(3) the likelihood of success on the merits; <br /> <br />(4) the public interest; and <br /> <br />(5) administrative burdens in enforcing a temporary decree. <br /> <br />Lindberg v. Gebo, 381 N.W.2d 905, 907 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986) (quoting Paradataof <br /> <br />Minnesota v. Fox, 356 N.W.2d 852, 854 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984); see also Dahlberg Bros., <br /> <br />Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 272 Minn. 264, 274-75, 137 N.W.2d 314, 321-22 (1965) <br /> <br />("Dahlberg factors"). <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />-135- <br />