Short answer. Yes, if the court finds it necessary to preserve the parties' rights. It may grant a preliminary injunction upon your filing a bond in favor of the adverse party, conditioned on paying their damages and costs if your petition is later dismissed or you fail on the merits.

What the law says

The court in which the petition is filed, may grant such preliminary injunction as may be necessary for the preservation of the rights of the parties, upon the filing by the petitioner of a bond in favor of the adverse party, conditioned that if the petition is dismissed or the petitioner fails on the trial of the case upon its merits, he will pay the adverse party all damages and costs that may be awarded to him by reason of the issuance of such injunction or the other proceedings following the petition; but such injunction shall not operate to discharge or extinguish any lien which the adverse party may have acquired upon the property of the petitioner.

Rule 38, Section 5 — Preliminary injunction pending proceedings. Read the full provision →

Injunction available while the petition is pending

The court in which the petition for relief is filed may grant a preliminary injunction as may be necessary for the preservation of the rights of the parties, for as long as the petition remains pending and undecided. This lets a petitioner ask the court to hold off on enforcement of the underlying judgment while the petition is still being resolved, instead of having to absorb the consequences of enforcement before the petition is even decided. Nothing in the section obligates the court to grant this injunction automatically upon request; the petitioner must still show that an injunction is genuinely necessary to preserve the parties' rights while the petition works its way through the court.

The bond requirement

Before such an injunction issues, the petitioner must file a bond in favor of the adverse party. That bond is conditioned on the petitioner paying the adverse party all damages and costs that may later be awarded, in the event the petition is dismissed or the petitioner ultimately fails on the merits of the case, so the adverse party is not left without recourse if the injunction turns out to have been unwarranted. Requiring the bond, rather than granting the injunction for free, balances the petitioner's need for protection against the adverse party's interest in eventually being made whole if the petition proves meritless.

What the injunction does not undo

Even where granted, the injunction does not operate to discharge or extinguish any lien that the adverse party may have already acquired on the petitioner's property before the injunction was issued. The safeguard is meant to preserve the status quo during the petition, not to strip away rights the adverse party had already secured. In other words, the injunction operates only prospectively, preserving the situation going forward, rather than reaching back to cancel security interests the adverse party already validly obtained. A creditor who has already levied on or otherwise secured an interest in the petitioner's property keeps that position intact throughout the life of the petition, notwithstanding the injunction against further enforcement steps.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.