temporary restraining order - Finance & Commerce

4. Granting injunctive relief will not cause the Court administrative burden.
In this case, there are no administrative burdens if the Court issues a Temporary
Restraining Order. The Court would only have to issue one order: Enjoin performance of the
contract. Violations of such an order, if any, can be easily detected and offending parties are
subject to sanction. This Dahlberg Factor is not a significant factor in the Court’s analysis.
Nonetheless, there are no administrative burdens for the Court to be concerned about and this
issue should not be any impediment to the issuance of an injunction.
B. The Court is empowered to require only a nominal security bond to preserve
the ability of bidders to police public procurements.
The Court should require only a nominal bond or cash deposit. Minnesota Rule of Civil
Procedure 65.03 requires applicants for an injunction to post a security bond or other security to
mitigate the defendant’s damages if the injunction is ultimately found to be improvidently
granted. The amount of the bond or security, however, is in the full discretion of the court,
subject only to a $2,000 minimum. Minn. R. Civ. P. 65.03 (“in such sum as the court deems
proper”); Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 135 (setting $2,000 minimum); Paradata of Minnesota, Inc. v.
Fox, 356 N.W.2d 852, 855 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984) (“The trial judge has wide discretion is setting
the amount of the bond.”).
In this case, as discussed above, any damage to the City caused by the injunction would
be minimal. Moreover, any injury claimed by the City resulting from any delays could have
easily been avoided had the City followed Minnesota law. Any damages alleged by St. Paul are
self-inflicted. This Court should reject any argument by the City (or even Ryan should it seek to
intervene in this lawsuit) that delays caused by an injunction are worthy of recognition by the
Court.
N:\PL\85155\85155-001\1607234.docx 18