Jacinto v. Casey

115 R.I. 914
Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided September 9, 1975·No. M. P. No. 75-249·Published

Opinion

It appearing from the record that the trial justice in issuing a preliminary injunction against the defendants apparently failed to comply with the mandate of Super. R. Civ. P. 65(a), and thereby denied the defendants an effective opportunity to present relevant evidence, the defendants’ motion for a stay pending appeal is granted. Marshall Durbin Farms, Inc. v. National Farmers Organization, Inc., 446 F.2d 353 (5th Cir. 1971); Sims v. Greene, 161 F.2d 87 (3d Cir. 1947); 1 Kent, R. I. Civ. Prac. §65.3 (1969).

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

Jacinto v. Casey, 115 R.I. 914 (R.I. 1975).

115 R.I. 914 (Jacinto v. Casey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sims v. Greene
161 F.2d 87 (Third Circuit, 1947)