Mental anguish damages are recoverable for wrongful issuance of temporary restraining order only where conduct was outrageous

Law Reporter, May 1999

Arco Oil dr Gas Co. v. DeShazer, _ So. 2d -, No. 98-C1487,1999 WL 21327 (La. Jan. 20, 1999).

The Louisiana high court held that mental anguish damages are only recoverable for wrongful issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) if conduct was outrageous.

Here, DeShazer, a retired employee of Arco, was hired as a defense consultant in a case brought by his former employer. Arco sought to enjoin DeShazer from acting as a consultant, claiming it would suffer irreparable injury if he disclosed certain business information. The trial judge granted Arco a TRO but later denied Arco's request for a preliminary injunction and dissolved the TRO. DeShazer sought mental anguish damages under LA. CODE CIV. PRoc. ANN. art. 3608 for wrongful issuance of the TRO. The trial judge dismissed DeShazer's claim. The appellate court reversed in part, awarding DeShazer damages. On remand, the appellate court reaffirmed its holding.

Reversing the award, the state high court noted damages for mental anguish may be awarded for wrongful issuance of a TRO because the legislature had not excluded such damages under article 3608. However, the court said, recovery under article 3608 is not fault-based, making mental anguish damages appropriate only in limited circumstances. Moreover, failure to impose a high standard for recovery of mental anguish damages would have a chilling effect on parties seeking injunctive relief in good faith.

Thus, the court concluded, the same narrow standard governing liability for damages in negligent or intentional infliction of emotional distress cases-which requires outrageous or egregious conduct-also applies to recovery for mental anguish. Finding that Arco had not behaved in an outrageous or egregious manner when it sought and obtained its TRO, the court found mental anguish damages inappropriate here.