Eldridge v. Wright

California Supreme Court
Eldridge v. Wright, 15 Cal. 88 (Cal. 1860)
Baldwin

Eldridge v. Wright

Opinion of the Court

Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, C. J. and Cope, J. concurring.

Application for injunction. We deny the application. We see no necessity for this application, if we had the power to grant it, for the remedy of the plaintiff under the order reviving the injunction pending the appeal is ample to protect the plaintiff until the appeal can be heard, or the injunction be dissolved by some competent authority.

Reference

Full Case Name
ELDRIDGE v. WRIGHTs.
Cited By
3 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Plaintiffs obtained a preliminary injunction restraining defendants from obstructing a road leading to plaintiffs’ mine. Upon the answer being filed, the injunction was dissolved. Plaintiffs being about to appeal from the order dissolving the injunction, the Judge below thereupon made an order that, upon such appeal being perfected by filing a bond, etc., as required by him, the . order granting the injunction should be revived and continue in force. Plaintiffs perfect the appeal, and apply to the Supreme Court for an injunction pending the appeal, on the ground that defendants are disregarding said reviving order, and obstructing to the ruin of plaintiffs. Held, that the application must be denied, if this Court had the power to grant it; that the remedy of plaintiff under the reviving order is ample to protect him, until the appeal can be heard, or the injunction be dissolved by some competent authority.