Honeywood v. Rockefeller
371 U.S. 1, 83 S. Ct. 30, 9 L. Ed. 2d 49, 1962 U.S. LEXIS 514
Opinion
Since we agree with the District Court, from our examination of the record, “that no good cause has been shown for the granting of a preliminary injunction in advance of a trial upon which the facts necessary for a determination of the merits of this action can be fully developed,” the motion to affirm is granted and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Honeywood v. Rockefeller, 371 U.S. 1, 83 S. Ct. 30, 9 L. Ed. 2d 49, 1962 U.S. LEXIS 514 (1962).
371 U.S. 1 (Honeywood v. Rockefeller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Untitled Case
N.D. California, 2026
Dennis v. Torres
W.D. North Carolina, 2022
Davis v. City of National City
S.D. California, 2020
DesRoches v. USPS
2009 DNH 062 (D. New Hampshire, 2009)
Lackvic, MD v. Littleton Hosp.
D. New Hampshire, 1996
Schroeder v. Sager Elec. Supply
D. New Hampshire, 1996
RTC v. Glachman
D. New Hampshire, 1996
Brooker v. Powell
D. New Hampshire, 1995
Nova v. State
439 So. 2d 255 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Robert Theodore Weaver v. United States
418 F.2d 475 (Eighth Circuit, 1969)
State v. Taylor
421 S.W.2d 310 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1967)
United States v. Sanders
272 F. Supp. 245 (E.D. California, 1967)
Trent Boyes v. United States
354 F.2d 31 (Fifth Circuit, 1965)
United States v. Charles S. Pheribo
346 F.2d 559 (Second Circuit, 1965)
Honeywood v. Rockefeller
214 F. Supp. 897 (E.D. New York, 1963)
In re Scheitlin
99 F. 272 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri, 1900)