Mills v. Boyd
Opinion
The dissolution of the temporary restraining order at the interlocutory hearing of the application for injunction was in effect a refusal to grant a temporary injunction. Under the evidence the court did not abuse its discretion in refusing the injunction. The grant of a supersedeas conditioned upon the plaintiff giving bond was proper, it being within the court’s equitable authority to fix terms upon which a supersedeas would be granted. Civil Code (1910), § 5502. The fact that [61]*61after refusing the injunction the court put the defendant on terms was not a matter of which the plaintiff can complain.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
90 S.E. 378 (Mills v. Boyd) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.