Milan Steam Mills v. Hickey

59 N.H. 241
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedJune 5, 1879
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 N.H. 241 (Milan Steam Mills v. Hickey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Milan Steam Mills v. Hickey, 59 N.H. 241 (N.H. 1879).

Opinion

Allen, J.

If the plaintiffs lost their logs through the wrongful acts of the defendant, they are entitled to an adequate remedy. The defendant being insolvent, a suit at law would not afford relief, but would leave them to suffer irreparable injury, and the threatening purpose of the defendant would expose them to a constant recurrence of the mischief. To prevent irreparable injury, and give the plaintiffs an adequate remedy, equity will afford relief by enjoining the wrongful acts — Winnipiseogee Lake Co. v. Worster, 29 N. H. 443, 449, and cases cited Webber v. Grage, 39 N. H. 182 — and, as incident to the relief by injunction, will consider and adjust the question of damages. Bassett v. Salisbury Manf. Co., 43 N. H. 249.

Demurrer overruled.

Doe, C. J., did not sit: the others concurred.

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

Related

Amoskeag Manufacturing Co. v. Shirley
39 A. 976 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 N.H. 241, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/milan-steam-mills-v-hickey-nh-1879.