Trexler v. . Newsom

88 N.C. 13
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedFebruary 5, 1883
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 88 N.C. 13 (Trexler v. . Newsom) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Trexler v. . Newsom, 88 N.C. 13 (N.C. 1883).

Opinion

Ruffin, J.

Besides the express provision of the statute (C. C. P., § 190) that an injunction can only be granted at the commencement of the action, or sometime thereafter, there are several adjudications directly in point and fully sustaining the ruling of the judge. Patrick v. Joyner, 63 N. C., 573; McArthur v. McEachin, 64 N. C., 72; Hirsh v. Whitehead, 65 N. C., 516.

There are several reasons why we cannot adopt the suggestion of counsel and treat this proceeding as a motion in the cause, and amongst them the insuperable one growing out of the fact that there are two judgments, and therefore two distinct causes pending and but one proceeding, and we cannot tell to which it should be applied.

*15 In the opinion of this court the injunction was properly refused, and the judgment is therefore affirmed.

No Error'. Affirmed.

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

Related

Horne v. Commissioners of Cumberland County
29 S.E. 581 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1898)
Grant v. . Edwards
90 N.C. 31 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
88 N.C. 13, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trexler-v-newsom-nc-1883.