Gemmell v. Fox
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Gemmell v. Fox, 241 Pa. 146 (Pa. 1913)
88 A. 426; 1913 Pa. LEXIS 751
Brown, Elkin, Mestrezat, Moschzisker, Stewart
Gemmell v. Fox
Opinion of the Court
There is nothing in this case to take it out of the established rule that a preliminary injunction will not be disturbed where there was apparently sufficient ground for the action of the court below in awarding it. In the present case the learned chancellor said, in continuing the injunction, that, upon final hearing, when he would have the benefit of testimony on the part of the respondents, he might reach a different conclusion. Let the status quo remain until that hearing.
Appeal dismissed at appellants’ costs.
Reference
- Cited By
- 21 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- School law — Directors—Equity—Preliminary injunction — Abuse of discretion. 1. A preliminary injunction will be awarded in a taxpayers’ suit to restrain defendant school directors from acquiring a certain plot of ground for the erection of a school house, where the evidence shows that an additional room to an existing house would he sufficient to accommodate all the pupils of the school district for several years to come; that another lot equally desirable had been offered without cost to the school directors; that the lot proposed to be acquired overlaid coal beds owned by a corporation, without responsibility for supporting the ground above, and that to purchase the right of support from the owners of the coal would cost a large sum of money. Where the court is satisfied that the school directors are influenced by other considerations, than the public interest in the proposed action, a preliminary injunction will be issued. 2. Where there is apparently gufficient ground for the action of the court below in awarding a preliminary injunction, it will not be disturbed on appeal; the status quo will be preserved until final hearing.