N.D. Cent. Code » Title 32 · Chapter 32-05
North Dakota Century Code

N.D. Cent. Code § 32-05-05 (2026)

When injunction not granted

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ND-LEGndlegis.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

An injunction cannot be granted: 1. To stay a judicial proceeding pending at the commencement of the action in which the injunction is demanded, unless such restraint is necessary to prevent a multiplicity of such proceedings. 2. To stay proceedings in a court of the United States. 3. To stay proceedings in any other state upon a judgment of a court of that state. 4. To prevent the execution of a public statute by officers of the law for the public benefit. 5. To prevent the breach of a contract, the performance of which could not be specifically enforced. 6. To prevent the exercise of a public or private office in a lawful manner by the person in possession. 7. To prevent a legislative act by a municipal corporation.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1974–2016 · leading case: Schauer v. Jamestown Coll., 323 N.W.2d 114 (N.D. 1982).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Schauer v. Jamestown Coll., 323 N.W.2d 114 (N.D. 1982). · cites it 6× “’ Section 32-05-05, N.D.C.C.; Mevorah v. Goodman, 65 N.”
Black Gold Oil Field Servs., LLC v. City of Williston, 2016 ND 30 (N.D. 2016). · cites it 2× “Williston responds Black Gold is not likely to prevail on the merits on this issue because Willi-ston’s legislative decision is not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.”
Riemers v. Jaeger, 827 N.W.2d 330 (N.D. 2013). · cites it 2× ““An injunction cannot be granted ... to prevent the execution of a public statute by officers of the law for the public benefit [or] to prevent the exercise of a public or private office in a lawful manner by the person in possession.”
Shark Bros., Inc. v. Cass Cnty., 256 N.W.2d 701 (N.D. 1977). “ss County auditor and the other defendants answered the complaint with a general denial, except as to those facts which are not pertinent to the disposition of this case, and filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that it does not fall within the purview of §…”
Samuels v. White Shield Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 85, 297 N.W.2d 421 (N.D. 1980). · cites it 2× “1974), Samuels would be entitled, apparently, to specific performance and he might also be entitled to an injunction pursuant to § 32-05-05(5), and Chapter 32-06, NDCC. Another remedy available might be declaratory judgment, Chapter 32-23, NDCC.”
Henley v. Fingal Pub. Sch. Dist. 54, 219 N.W.2d 106 (N.D. 1974). · cites it 2× “” Section 32-05-05, N.D.C.C.; Mevorah v. Goodman, 65 N.”
City of West Fargo v. City of Fargo, 251 N.W.2d 918 (N.D. 1977). · cites it 2× “On May 18, 1976, the district court held a hearing and vacated its temporary restraining order. Thereafter, Fargo purportedly completed annexation of the disputed quarter-section.”
Burgard v. Burgard, 2013 ND 27 (N.D. 2013). · cites it 2× ““An injunction cannot be granted . . . to prevent the execution of a public statute by officers of the law for the public benefit [or] to prevent the exercise of a public or private office in a lawful manner by the person in possession.”
N.D. Cent. Code § 32-05-05(4): 3 cases
Riemers v. Jaeger, 827 N.W.2d 330 (N.D. 2013). ““An injunction cannot be granted ... to prevent the execution of a public statute by officers of the law for the public benefit [or] to prevent the exercise of a public or private office in a lawful manner by the person in possession.”
Shark Bros., Inc. v. Cass Cnty., 256 N.W.2d 701 (N.D. 1977). “ss County auditor and the other defendants answered the complaint with a general denial, except as to those facts which are not pertinent to the disposition of this case, and filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that it does not fall within the purview of §…”
Burgard v. Burgard, 2013 ND 27 (N.D. 2013). ““An injunction cannot be granted . . . to prevent the execution of a public statute by officers of the law for the public benefit [or] to prevent the exercise of a public or private office in a lawful manner by the person in possession.”
N.D. Cent. Code § 32-05-05(5): 2 cases
Schauer v. Jamestown Coll., 323 N.W.2d 114 (N.D. 1982). “’ Section 32-05-05, N.D.C.C.; Mevorah v. Goodman, 65 N.”
Samuels v. White Shield Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 85, 297 N.W.2d 421 (N.D. 1980). “1974), Samuels would be entitled, apparently, to specific performance and he might also be entitled to an injunction pursuant to § 32-05-05(5), and Chapter 32-06, NDCC. Another remedy available might be declaratory judgment, Chapter 32-23, NDCC.”
N.D. Cent. Code § 32-05-05(7): 1 case
Black Gold Oil Field Servs., LLC v. City of Williston, 2016 ND 30 (N.D. 2016). “Williston responds Black Gold is not likely to prevail on the merits on this issue because Willi-ston’s legislative decision is not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.