Waldron v. Marsh
This text of 5 Cal. 119 (Waldron v. Marsh) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Murray, C. J., concurred.
An injunction ought not to be granted in aid of an action of trespass, unless it appear that the injury will be irreparable, and cannot be compensated in damages.
[120]*120In this ease, how the cutting of a ditch through the plaintiff’s land would be such an injury I cannot imagine. It is not sufficient that the affidavit alleges that the injury would be irreparable—it must be shown to the Court how and why it would be so, otherwise the extraordinary remedy of injunction will not be allowed, especially where no action has ever determined the plaintiff's rights.
The injunction in this case ought not to have been granted, and the order dissolving it is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
5 Cal. 119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waldron-v-marsh-cal-1855.