The rural water association sued the municipality in 2008, alleging encroachment in an area that the association claimed was covered by Section 1926(b) monopoly protection. The assocation asked for preliminary injunctive relief in the form of an order requiring that the municipality turn over control of the disputed customers. The trial court granted the preliminary injunction. In reversing the preliminary injunction, the Fifth Circuit held:
There is nothing to suggest that harm suffered between the time of suit and the time of ultimate decision in this case would seriously prejudice Bluefield's opportunity for full recovery, so there is no irreparable injury-in traditional terms of equity, the remedy at law is adequate. That is, any harm is financial, and monetary compensation will make Bluefield whole if Bluefield prevails on the merits. True, courts have granted injunctive relief to protect rural providers' interest in serving their certificated areas, and the grant of relief to allow Bluefield's to serve the eastern service area may ultimately be appropriate here. But at this stage in the proceedings, given the long service by Starkville of these customers with no complaint from Bluefield, and the lack of irreparable harm to Bluefield, granting this preliminary relief was an abuse of discretion.