Most lawsuits move slowly. Emergency relief is the part of business litigation where everything happens fast.
A partner is moving money out of the company. A former employee is about to disclose trade secrets to a competitor. A debtor is wiring the proceeds of a fraudulent sale offshore. A new business is launching tomorrow on a customer list that was emailed home the week before resignation. In each of these situations, waiting two years for a trial is not a remedy. By the time the verdict comes in, the damage is done.
Emergency relief is the court intervention that happens between the filing of the lawsuit and the trial, sometimes within hours. Temporary restraining orders, temporary injunctions, asset freeze orders, receiverships, and the pre-judgment writs of attachment, garnishment, and sequestration are each a distinct legal tool with its own requirements and limits. This page is the entry point to the cluster; the sub-pages cover each tool in depth.
When emergency relief is the right tool
Three categories of cases drive most of the emergency relief work this firm does.
The bad-actor co-owner. A partner, shareholder, or LLC member is depleting the company’s assets, diverting customers, hiring employees away, or otherwise damaging the business while a business divorce dispute is unresolved. The TRO and temporary injunction restrain the offending conduct while the underlying case proceeds. Receivership is available in extreme cases where the company itself needs court-appointed management. See Business Divorce and Partnership Theft and Misappropriation.
The departing employee. A key employee leaves with confidential information, customer relationships, or both. The TRO stops the use and disclosure pending fuller relief. Expedited discovery develops the evidence in the brief window before the temporary injunction hearing. See Non-Compete Agreements Texas and Trade Secret Misappropriation Under TUTSA.
The dissipating defendant. A defendant in any kind of business case is moving assets to defeat the eventual judgment. Pre-judgment writs of attachment, garnishment, or sequestration freeze the assets pending judgment. Asset freeze orders under the court’s equitable injunction power can reach beyond what the pre-judgment writs cover. These cases often connect to the firm’s Dallas Fraudulent Transfer practice.
A single case often involves multiple emergency tools running in parallel. A business divorce case may include a TRO against the bad-actor partner, expedited discovery to develop the partnership financial records, and a separate asset freeze action against the partner’s personal accounts. The tools work together.
The four-element standard that runs through this cluster
Most of the emergency relief tools in this cluster require the applicant to satisfy a four-element substantive standard:
- A cause of action against the defendant.
- A probable right to recover on that cause of action.
- A probable, imminent, and irreparable injury in the interim.
- No adequate remedy at law.
The four elements come from injunctive relief case law. They appear in TRO practice, temporary injunction practice, asset freeze orders issued under the court’s injunctive power, and many receivership cases. The wording varies slightly among the different tools, but the substance is consistent.
The pre-judgment writs of attachment, garnishment, and sequestration under Chapters 61-63 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code have their own statutory requirements. Those requirements overlap with the four-element injunctive standard but add specific evidentiary showings tied to each writ. See Attachment, Garnishment, and Sequestration.
TRO vs temporary injunction vs asset freeze
Three tools that share the same four-element standard but answer different questions.
| TRO | Temporary injunction | Asset freeze | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Question it answers | “Stop this right now” | “Keep it stopped through trial” | “Don’t move these specific assets” |
| Duration | Up to 14 days, with one 14-day extension | Until final judgment | Until lifted or judgment |
| Notice | Can be ex parte in a genuine emergency | After notice and a hearing | Tied to its mechanism |
| Core requirement | Verified petition; immediate, irreparable harm | Probable right plus probable, imminent, irreparable injury; bond | A recognized basis (specific equitable claim, TUFTA, traceable funds, or statutory writ) — no general freeze for money-damages claims |
| More | TROs | Temporary injunctions | Asset freeze orders |
The sub-pages in this cluster
TROs in Texas Business Cases. Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 680-687. The verified petition requirement. Ex parte versus notice. The 14-day duration and one possible 14-day extension. The bond requirement under Rule 684. The temporary injunction hearing that follows. Common business case uses.
Temporary Injunctions. The substantive evidentiary hearing that follows the TRO. The same four-element standard supported by actual evidence rather than verified pleadings. Discovery in advance of the hearing. The appealability of the temporary injunction ruling under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 51.014(a)(4).
Expedited Discovery. The discovery that takes place between the TRO and the temporary injunction hearing, and the procedural mechanisms for obtaining it. Forensic imaging of devices. Limited depositions. Targeted document requests. Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 192 framework and how it applies in compressed timelines.
Asset Freeze Orders. Court orders that prohibit a defendant from transferring, dissipating, or encumbering assets. Available under the injunctive power of the court in appropriate cases. Distinct from pre-judgment writs. Most often used in fraud cases, business divorce cases involving misappropriation, and fraudulent transfer matters.
Receiverships in Business Disputes. The Texas Business Organizations Code receivership remedy at TBOC section 11.404 (rehabilitation receivership). Common-law and equitable receiverships. Pre-judgment versus post-judgment receivership. The substantial cost and disruption of receivership and when it actually fits the case.
Attachment, Garnishment, and Sequestration. The three statutory pre-judgment writs under Chapters 61, 63, and 62 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Each has its own statutory predicates, bond requirements, and procedural framework. Each reaches different categories of property.
The role of forensic preservation and rapid investigation
Emergency relief cases share a common operational characteristic: they require fast, accurate factual development at the front end.
A TRO petition has to set forth specific facts. The verified pleading or affidavit cannot rest on generalized allegations of wrongdoing. The court has to see the email exchange, the wire transfer record, the deleted file recovery, the customer communication.
This means most emergency relief cases start with a brief, intense investigation phase. Forensic counsel images devices. The client’s IT department pulls logs. Outside consultants reconstruct the electronic record. Internal interviews develop the factual timeline. All of that happens in the days before the petition is filed, and the work continues through the temporary injunction hearing.
Clients who engage us early enough that the forensic work can be done thoroughly fare better than clients who wait until the case has to be filed immediately. Time at the front end is the cheapest time in the case.
Where this cluster connects to others
Emergency relief is not a standalone area of substantive law. It is the procedural toolkit that gets applied to substantive claims across the rest of the practice. The clusters where emergency relief recurs most often:
- Owner and partner disputes. TROs and temporary injunctions against bad-actor co-owners; receiverships in extreme cases. See Business Divorce.
- Non-compete and trade secret enforcement. TROs and temporary injunctions against departing employees and competitors. See Non-Compete and Trade Secrets.
- Fraud and fraudulent transfer. Asset freezes, pre-judgment writs, and parallel proceedings in fraudulent transfer. See Fraud and Fraudulent Inducement.
- Defending the emergency proceeding. Responding to a TRO filed against you. See Responding to a TRO Against Your Texas Business.
Speed is the whole practice here
Emergency relief rewards fast, focused execution. A smaller firm does that better than a large one, provided it has handled enough of these cases to know what it is doing. We have since 1994. The TRO petition gets drafted in days, not weeks. Forensic counsel gets engaged immediately. The verified pleading rests on actual evidence, not aspirational allegations. We draft orders that comply with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 683, because a TRO or temporary injunction that lacks specificity is void on its face, ours identify the specific conduct prohibited and the specific reasons for it. And we say so when emergency relief is the wrong move. Not every dispute needs a TRO, and some cases get worse when one is sought and denied. Whether the four-element standard can actually be met is part of the intake conversation.
The cheapest hour in an emergency relief case is the first one. Call before the wire clears or the hearing date is set, not after.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is emergency relief in a Texas business case?
Emergency relief is preliminary court intervention granted before the merits of a case are tried. The most common forms in Texas business litigation are temporary restraining orders (TROs), temporary injunctions, asset freeze orders, receiverships, and pre-judgment writs of attachment, garnishment, or sequestration. Each requires a showing of urgency, a likelihood of success on the merits, and some form of harm that cannot be adequately addressed by a money judgment after trial.
What is the difference between a TRO and a temporary injunction in Texas?
A TRO is short-term emergency relief, typically granted on a verified petition with limited evidence, lasting up to 14 days with one possible 14-day extension. A temporary injunction follows after a contested evidentiary hearing and lasts until the case is tried on the merits. The standards are the same (cause of action, probable right to recover, imminent and irreparable injury, no adequate remedy at law), but the showing required at the temporary injunction stage is supported by actual evidence rather than just verified pleadings.
Can a Texas court freeze a defendant's assets before judgment?
In the right case, yes. Texas allows pre-judgment asset freezes through several mechanisms: temporary injunctions, pre-judgment writs of attachment under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Chapter 61, writs of garnishment under Chapter 63, and writs of sequestration under Chapter 62. Each has its own statutory requirements. Asset freezes are most often available when there is evidence the defendant is dissipating assets or about to leave the jurisdiction.
When does a Texas business case need a receiver?
Receivership is the most invasive form of emergency relief in Texas business litigation. A receiver takes control of property or an entity during litigation when the court determines that less invasive remedies are inadequate. Common contexts include business divorce cases with bad-actor co-owners, partnership disputes involving misappropriation, and post-judgment proceedings to enforce collection. Texas courts apply the receivership remedy carefully and require a strong evidentiary showing.
How quickly can I get emergency relief in a Texas business case?
TROs can be obtained the same day or within a few days when the case is properly prepared and the facts support emergency relief. Temporary injunction hearings typically occur within 10 to 14 days of the TRO. Asset freeze orders and receiverships generally take longer because the evidentiary showings are more demanding, but emergency timelines are still measured in days, not weeks. The speed depends heavily on how well the case is prepared at the time of filing.