Edudata Corp. v. Scientific Computers, Inc., 84-5181

Decision Date12 October 1984
Docket NumberNo. 84-5181,84-5181
Citation746 F.2d 429
PartiesEDUDATA CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. SCIENTIFIC COMPUTERS, INC., Hubert H. Humphrey III, and Michael A. Hatch, Defendants. SCIENTIFIC COMPUTERS, INC., Plaintiff, v. EDUDATA CORPORATION, Shamrock Associates, Sun Equities Corporation, Paul Koether, and Natalie Koether, Defendants.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Robert J. Sheran, Minneapolis, Minn. and Theodore Altman, New York City, for Edudata Corp.

Roger Magnuson, Minneapolis, Minn. and Barry Greller, St. Paul, Minn., for Scientific Computers.

Before ARNOLD, FAGG and BOWMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Edudata Corporation, which wishes to acquire the stock of Scientific Computers, Inc., brings this appeal from two related orders of the District Court: 1 (1) an order denying Edudata's motion for a temporary restraining order to prevent the enforcement of the Minnesota Take-Over Act, 1984 Minn.Laws Ch. 488, to be codified as Minn.Stat.Ann. Chs. 80B, 302A; and (2) an order granting Scientific Computers' motion for a temporary restraining order suspending Edudata's tender offer for the stock of Scientific Computers (SCI).

The appeal from the denial of Edudata's motion for a temporary restraining order is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The grant or denial of such orders is ordinarily not appealable. Edudata will have a full opportunity to press its claim that the recently enacted state statute is unconstitutional at the hearing on the parties' motions for preliminary injunctions, scheduled for October 17, 1984.

As for the order (captioned a temporary restraining order) suspending Edudata's tender offer, we agree with Edudata that it is in substance a preliminary injunction and is therefore appealable. The order on its face is to last more than the ten days to which temporary restraining orders are initially limited by Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(b). But our review of such orders is doubly circumscribed. Not only are the District Court's findings of fact binding on us unless clearly erroneous; we may not disturb that court's balancing of the equities absent an abuse of discretion. The District Court found that the balance of hardship tipped in favor of SCI. On this record, we have no definite and firm conviction that this finding is mistaken. Nor do we see here any abuse of discretion.

Edudata points out (correctly) that the District Court made no finding as to likelihood of success on the merits. Certainly such a finding is a normal incident of rulings on motions for preliminary equitable relief. But we do not understand the chancellor's discretion to be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • West Pub. Co. v. Mead Data Cent., Inc.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 4 de setembro de 1986
    ...review of a "final decision" on an appeal taken pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291. O'Connor and Edudata Corp v. Scientific Computers, Inc., 746 F.2d 429, 430 (8th Cir.1984) (per curiam), both cited in the majority opinion (supra, at 1222-23) are but two recent Eighth Circuit cases that recogn......
  • Scientific Computers, Inc. v. Edudata Corp., Civil No. 4-84-978.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • 24 de outubro de 1984
    ...offer will neither be renewed nor denied at that time without full and careful findings." Edudata Corporation v. Scientific Computers, Inc., 746 F.2d 429, at 430 (8th Cir.1984) (per curiam). At 2:00 p.m. on October 17, 1984, a hearing on the preliminary injunction motions in this matter and......
  • Airlines Reporting Corp. v. Barry
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 29 de julho de 1987
    ...and that in issuing the preliminary injunction it did not abuse its discretion. As we stated in Edudata Corp. v. Scientific Computers, Inc., 746 F.2d 429, 430 (8th Cir.1984) (per curiam), in reviewing entry of a preliminary injunction, "[n]ot only are the District Court's findings of fact b......
  • Nordin v. Nutri/System, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 28 de fevereiro de 1990
    ...Quinn v. Missouri, 839 F.2d 425, 426 (8th Cir.1988) (subsequent history omitted) (per curiam); Edudata Corp. v. Scientific Computers, Inc., 746 F.2d 429, 430 (8th Cir.1984) (per curiam). The April 18 temporary restraining order--which has no expiration date on its face and which exceeded th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT