Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Amy MCBRIDE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WARDEN; Larry Hogan, Governor; Stephen Moyer, Defendants - Appellees, Office of the Attorney General, Party-in-Interest.
Amy McBride, an inmate at the Maryland Correctional Institute for Women (“MCI-W”), appeals the district court's order denying injunctive relief. She also moves this court for injunctive relief, for a stay, and to expedite.
“A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy never awarded as of right.” Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24, 129 S.Ct. 365, 172 L.Ed.2d 249 (2008). “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.” Id. at 20, 129 S.Ct. 365. We review the denial of a motion for preliminary injunction for abuse of discretion. See Di Biase v. SPX Corp., 872 F.3d 224, 229 (4th Cir. 2017). We have recognized that “sweeping intervention in the management of state prisons is rarely appropriate when exercising the equitable powers of the federal courts.” Taylor v. Freeman, 34 F.3d 266, 269 (4th Cir. 1994).
After reviewing the record, we conclude that McBride has not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits. We therefore affirm the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction. We deny McBride's motion for injunctive relief and for a stay, and decline as moot her motion to expedite. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 18-7362
Decided: February 14, 2019
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)