Belcher v. Steele
This text of 37 S.W. 135 (Belcher v. Steele) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Complainant filed the bill in this cause to restrain the defendant from alleged interferences with complainant’s possession and enjoyment of certain real estate. Preliminary injunction was issued and served.
The defendant filed his answer, and thereupon asked a dissolution of the injunction. The Chan[407]*407cellor overruled and disallowed that motion, and from his action in so doing the defendant sued out a writ of error before the Clerk of this Court.
The Court of Chancery Appeals dismissed the writ of error as premature, and from the decree of dismissal the defendant has appealed to this Court.
The action of the Court of Chancery Appeals was right. A writ of error will not lie from an interlocutory order refusing to dissolve an injunction. It lies from final judgments and decrees only. Code (M. & V.), § 3895; Gibson v. Widener, 85 Tenn., 16; Younger v. Younger, 90 Tenn., 25; Gurley v. Railroad, 91 Tenn., 486.
Affirm.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
37 S.W. 135, 97 Tenn. 406, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/belcher-v-steele-tenn-1896.