990 F.2d 1259 (9th Cir. 1993), 92-56383, Pasadena Community Development Com'n v. Pottmeyer

Docket Nº:92-56383.
Citation:990 F.2d 1259
Party Name:PASADENA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, for itself and in Parens Patriae; City of Pasadena, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Thomas POTTMEYER, Defendant-Appellee.
Case Date:April 12, 1993
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 1259

990 F.2d 1259 (9th Cir. 1993)

PASADENA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, for itself and in Parens Patriae; City of Pasadena, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

Thomas POTTMEYER, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-56383.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

April 12, 1993

Editorial Note:

This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

Argued and Submitted March 2, 1993.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; No. CV-91-6305-AWT, A. Wallace Tashima, District Judge, Presiding.

C.D.Cal.

AFFIRMED.

Before SCHROEDER, THOMPSON and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM [*]

The Pasadena Community Development Commission ("Commission") and the City of Pasadena ("City") appeal the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction to bar Jona Goldrich, Sol Kest, Robert Hirsch, and Warren Breslow (collectively the "G & K Defendants") from transferring to Thomas Pottmeyer their 51% interest in the King's Villages Limited Partnership ("Partnership"). The Partnership owns the publicly assisted King's Villages Housing Project ("Project"), formerly called King's Manor.

The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Notice of appeal was timely filed. Fed.R.App.P. 4(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We affirm.

1. Preliminary Injunction

To obtain a preliminary injunction, the moving party must show either a combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable harm, or that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardships tips sharply in the moving party's favor. Rodeo Collection, Ltd. v. West Seventh, 812 F.2d 1215, 1217 (9th Cir.1987). "[T]he required showing of harm varies inversely with the required showing of meritoriousness." Id. (internal quotations omitted).

Our review of the denial of a preliminary injunction is limited. Associated Gen. Contractors of Cal., Inc. v. Coalition for Economic Equity, 950 F.2d 1401, 1405 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 985, 112 S.Ct. 1670 (1992). "We will reverse the denial of a preliminary injunction only if the district court abused its discretion or relied on an erroneous legal premise or clearly erroneous finding of fact." Id. "We review de...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP