O'Donnell v. Lehigh Navigation Coal Co.
This text of 188 A. 348 (O'Donnell v. Lehigh Navigation Coal Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The court below did not err in decreeing a mandatory injunction to restore the track pending final disposition of the case. See Jones v. Securities Commission, 298 U. S. 1, 16; Easton Passenger Ry. Co. v. Easton, 133 Pa. 505, 521; Clark v. Martin, 49 Pa. 289; Cooke v. Boynton, 135 Pa. 102; Whiteman v. Fayette Fuel-Gas Co., 139 Pa. 492. “Equity . . . will not allow itself to *370 be baffled by a wrongful change while its aid is being invoked. The modern cases . . . have established the rule that the status quo which will be preserved . . . is the last actual, peaceable, noncontested status which preceded the pending controversy, and [it] will not permit a wrongdoer to shelter himself behind a suddenly . . . changed status . . . ”: Fredericks v. Huber, 180 Pa. 572. While this was said in another case on different facts it is applicable here.
Decree affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
188 A. 348, 324 Pa. 369, 1936 Pa. LEXIS 526, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/odonnell-v-lehigh-navigation-coal-co-pa-1936.