Reading Co. v. Driscoll
This text of 198 A. 140 (Reading Co. v. Driscoll) 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
Opinion by
This appeal is from an order of the court below continuing the injunction in favor of the Beading Company, pending final hearing without entertaining any hearing whatsoever on continuance. The same constitutional *117 objections were raised in this case as in No. 8, May Term, 1938, and the court suggested that the injunction be continued until the determination of the case entered to No. 8, May Term, 1938. Since it appears that the court below made the order to relieve the parties of the necessity of duplicating much of the argument and testimony presented in that case, and to relieve the court of the impossible task of hearing immediately twenty-two motions similar to those involved in the appeal mentioned, all predicated upon the same principles of law, there appears to be no error in the order. The court did not deny appellants the right to produce evidence against the continuance as was the case in Kittanning Brewing Co. v. American Natural Gas Co., 224 Pa. 129, and that right is preserved by the order made in No. 8, May Term, 1938.
Remanded with a procedendo.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
198 A. 140, 330 Pa. 116, 1938 Pa. LEXIS 567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reading-co-v-driscoll-pa-1938.