Horn v. Talmage

8 N.J. Eq. 108
New Jersey Court of Chancery·Decided December 15, 1849·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The Chancellor.

I think the injunction should not he continued. If the complainants have rights which will he violated by any proposed action of the defendants, or either of them, they are rights for the violation of which a remedy at law may be had. The nature or extent of the injury sought to be prevented by injunction are not such as should induce this Court to interpose by injunction.

Without expressing any opinion, therefore, as to the strict legal rights of the parties, I think the case, as developed by the bill and answer, is such as should, in the discretion which the Court of Chancery exercises in reference to injunctions, determine the Court to leave the parties to their legal remedies, if they have any.

Injunction dissolved.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Horn v. Talmage, 8 N.J. Eq. 108 (N.J. Ct. App. 1849).

8 N.J. Eq. 108 (Horn v. Talmage) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Scott v. Cholmondeley
18 A.2d 617 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1941)