Kirk Erichsen v. County of Orange
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM **
Appellants challenge the district court’s denial of their ex parte application for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) in which they sought to (1) enjoin state court child dependency proceedings and the enforcement of related protective custody and arrest warrants, and (2) stay all discovery in federal court. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), and we AFFIRM.
First, we note that the district court properly determined Appellants failed to meet the threshold requirement for ex parte relief because they did not establish they were “without fault in creating the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Manuel De Jesus Ortega Melendr v. Joseph M. ArpaioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce Political Action Committee v. City of San JoseCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Mission Power Engineering Co. v. Continental Casualty Co.District Court, C.D. California · 1995
- Lacy-Curry v. Alameda County Social Services AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
3Cited by5 opinions
- Duane Joachim v. Oakland Housing Authority, et al.District Court, N.D. California · 2026
- Mountjoy v. Bank of America, N.A.District Court, E.D. California · 2021
- Nunes v. StephensDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2022
- Shaylee Jackson v. State of Washington Department of Children Youth and Families, et al.District Court, W.D. Washington · 2026
- Stewart v. PecsiDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021