PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION - ABSENCE OF IRREPARABLE INJURY - SLAMEN V. SLAMEN
Slamen v. Slamen, [Ms. 1160578, Sept. 22, 2017] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2017). This decision by Justice Bryan (Stuart, C.J., and Bolin and Main, JJ., concur and Murdock, J., concurs in the result), reverses a preliminary injunction entered by the circuit court enjoining the defendants “‘from disbursing funds and profits of Harris, LLP,’ except as necessary for ordinary business expenses, pending resolution of Herbert’s claims.” Ms. *4-5. Herbert, a partner in the limited partnership, had sued the other partners alleging that they had failed to distribute proceeds due Herbert from the limited partnership. In reversing, the Court held that Herbert did not demonstrate an irreparable injury and was not entitled to injunctive relief. The Court held “‘a plaintiff that can recover damages has an adequate remedy at law and is not entitled to an injunction.’” Ms. *6, quoting Monte Sano Research Corp. v. Kratos Defense & Sec. Sols., Inc., 99 So. 3d 855, 861-62 (Ala. 2012). The Court also held that
Herbert’s mere allegation that, without the injunction, the defendants might be unable to satisfy a potential judgment remedying his alleged monetary loss does not transform his injury into an irreparable one that justifies injunctive relief.