## Facts

- The California Fish & Game Commission adopted the Channel Islands Marine Protected Area Project.
- The project created “no-take” zones in marine areas under the state’s control along the California coast.
- The Commission adopted the project in response to a long-term decline in fish stocks and a decline in fish habitat.
- Ventura County Commercial Fishermen’s Association sued the Commission challenging the project.
- The Association sought a temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop the project from taking effect during the litigation.
- The trial court denied the requested TRO.
- The Association appealed from the order denying the TRO.

## Issues

1. Did the trial court err (or abuse its discretion) in denying the Association’s request for a TRO to halt implementation of the Channel Islands Marine Protected Area Project pending resolution of the lawsuit?
2. For purposes of interim injunctive relief, did the Association make the required showing (including probable success on the merits and a balance of harms/public interest favoring an injunction), in light of the Commission’s authority over state-controlled marine areas?

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal upheld the trial court’s order denying the TRO.
- As a result, the Channel Islands Marine Protected Area Project was not enjoined on an interim basis and could proceed while the underlying dispute continued.

## Legal Principles

- A TRO (and other interim injunctive relief) is an extraordinary remedy committed to the trial court’s discretion.
- On review, an appellate court evaluates an order granting or denying interim injunctive relief under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.
- In deciding whether to grant interim injunctive relief, courts generally consider the applicant’s likelihood of success on the merits and the balance of interim harms, including effects on the public interest.
- Where interim relief would suspend a governmental resource-management measure, courts may consider the government’s asserted conservation and resource-protection interests when weighing interim harms.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeal upheld the denial of a temporary restraining order sought by the Ventura County Commercial Fishermen’s Association to stop implementation of the Channel Islands Marine Protected Area Project, leaving the Commission’s no-take zones in effect during the litigation because the trial court’s refusal to grant emergency injunctive relief was not reversible error under the standards governing TROs.


Ventura County Commercial Fishermen's Association v. California Fish & Game Commission, No. B166335, 2004 WL 293565 (2004)