Crowe v. De Gioia

In Crowe v. De Gioia, the New Jersey Supreme Court adopted the following four-part test for entering a preliminary injunction:

• (1) "One principle is that a preliminary injunction should not issue except when necessary to prevent irreparable harm. Harm is generally considered irreparable in equity if it cannot be redressed adequately by monetary damages. In certain circumstances, severe personal inconvenience can constitute irreparable injury justifying issuance of injunctive relief."

• (2) "A second principle is that temporary relief should be withheld when the legal right underlying plaintiff's claim is unsettled."

• (3) "A third rule is that a preliminary injunction should not issue where all material facts are controverted. Thus, to prevail on an application for temporary relief, a plaintiff must make a preliminary showing of a reasonable probability of ultimate success on the merits. That requirement is tempered by the principle that mere doubt as to the validity of the claim is not an adequate basis for refusing to maintain the status quo. Indeed, the point of temporary relief is to maintain the parties in substantially the same condition when the final decree is entered as they were when the litigation began."

• (4) "The final test in considering the granting of a preliminary injunction is the relative hardship to the parties in granting or denying relief. ... On balance, the equities favor the grant of temporary relief to maintain the status quo pending the outcome of a final hearing."

Crowe v. De Gioia, 90 N.J. 126, 132-134 (1982) (citations and quotations omitted).