« PředchozíPokračovat »
servants, and employees, be restrained from further using, managing, or operating the aforesaid Buckeye ditcher:
It is therefore by the court, after being duly advised in the premises, ordered, adjudged, and decreed, that the said J. O. Severns do forthwith deliver and turn over to the said F. M. English, receiver, the aforesaid Buckeye ditcher, now being used, operated, and controlled by said Severns, his agents, servants, and employees, and he is hereby directed and ordered by the court to deliver the aforesaid Buckeye ditcher to the aforesaid F. M. English, receiver.
It is further ordered, adjudged, and directed by the court, that the said J. O. Severns, his agents, employees, and all persons acting for him during the pendency of this action, be and they are each and all of them hereby restrained from any and all further use and management of the said Buckeye ditcher; this order and injunction to be and remain in full force and effect from the time of its signing until such time as J. O. Severns shall make, execute, and deliver to George W. Broe a good and sufficient bond in the sum of $5,000, the same to be approved by the clerk of the district court of Comanche County, Oklahoma, and conditioned and in compliance with a certain order made by this court in the case of George W. Broe, plaintiff, versus J. R. Hale, defendant, pending in the district court of Comanche County, Oklahoma, wherein this plaintiff, F. M. English, was appointed as a receiver to take charge of and control and manage the aforesaid Buckeye ditcher under the direction and control of the court. Said bond shall be conditioned to pay the judgment rendered in favor of George W. Broe versus John R. Hale as aforesaid, in the aforesaid cause. The order of injunction herein to be in force only after giving a good and sufficient bond in the sum of $2,500 by plaintiff to defendant, conditioned that plaintiff will pay defendant any damages sustained if it be finally determined that the order of injunction herein is wrongfully granted.
Done at Hobart, Kiowa County, Oklahoma, on this 12th day of April, 1905. F. E. Gillette, Judge of the District Court.
[Endorsed:] Filed April 12, 1905.
N. E. Sisson, Clerk.
By L. S. Eckles, Deputy.
FORM No. 1016-Injunction pendente lite to restrain continuance of trespass. (In Rohrer v. Babcock, 114 Cal. 124; 45 Pac. 1054; 126 Cal. 222; 58 Pac. 537.)1
[Title of court and cause.]
The people of the state of California to A. L. Babcock, greeting: The plaintiff having filed her complaint in the superior court of the county of Siskiyou against the defendant, praying for an injunction against the defendant, requiring him to refrain from certain acts in said complaint and hereinafter more particularly mentioned. On reading the said complaint in this action, duly verified, and it satisfactorily appearing to the said court therefrom that it is a proper case for an injunction, and that sufficient grounds exist therefor, and the necessary and proper undertaking having been given:
We, therefore, in consideration thereof, and of the particular matters of the said complaint set forth, do strictly command you, and each and all of you, that until the further order of said court you and each of you, your and each of your servants, agents, attorneys, employees, and all persons acting under the control, authority, or direction of you or either of you, do absolutely refrain from and desist from removing or molesting pending judgment in this action any of the hay contained in those two certain haystacks stacked near the center of the lower stockyards of the "Home Ranch" of John B. Rohrer, deceased, in said county and state, containing about fifty tons of hay, and being those two stacks of hay which were set apart as plaintiff's portion of the hay raised on the said "Home Ranch" during the year 1895.
Witness the Hon. J. S. Beard, judge of the superior court at Yreka, in the county of Siskiyou, and the seal of the said court, this 5th day of December, 1895.
Allen Newton, Clerk.
FORM No. 1017-Undertaking on injunction.
[Title of court and cause.]
Whereas, the above-named plaintiff has commenced, or is about to commence, an action in the superior court of the county of state of against the above-named defendant, and he is about to apply for an injunction in said action against the defendant,
1 For the complaint in this action, see ch. LXXI, form No. 521.
enjoining and restraining the defendant from the commission of certain acts, as in the complaint filed in the said action are more particularly set forth and described:
Now, therefore, we, the undersigned, residents of the county of in consideration of the premises, and of the issuing of said injunction, do jointly and severally undertake in the sum of $ and promise to the effect that in case said injunction shall issue the plaintiff will pay to the said party enjoined such damages, not exceeding the sum of $ as such party may sustain by reason of the injunction, if the said superior court shall finally decide that the plaintiff was not entitled thereto. day of
[Justification of sureties as in ch. CXXIV, form No. 1028, and filing endorsement.]
FORM No. 1018—Order granting motion dissolving injunction.
(In Long v. Newman, 10 Cal. App. 430; 102 Pac. 534.) [Title of court and cause.]
Present, J. M. Seawell, Judge, and officers of the court:
In this cause the motion of the defendant for an order to dissolve the temporary injunction issued herein came on regularly this day to be heard: Whereupon, after argument by counsel for the respective parties herein, it is ordered, that said motion be and the same is hereby granted [and said injunction is hereby dissolved].
[Signature of clerk.]
FORM No. 1019—Order dissolving or modifying injunction.
[Title of court and cause.]
It appearing to the court, upon due notice given to the plaintiff of a motion to dissolve [or to modify] the injunction heretofore granted in this action, that there is not legal or sufficient ground for said injunction [or that said injunction should be modified], for the following reasons, to wit: [Here state the same briefly.]
*It is therefore ordered, that said injunction be and the same is hereby dissolved.
[In case of motion to modify, beginning with the star (*), conclude as follows: "It is ordered, that said injunction be and the same is hereby modified" (stating in what respect the same is modified).]
S. T., Judge.
FORM No. 1020—Judgment for defendant dissolving temporary injunction, etc., in action to restrain a church society from converting church property, misdirecting its use, etc.
(In Cumberland Permanent Committee of Missions v. Pacific Synod of Presbyterian Church (Cal.), 106 Pac. 395.)
[Title of court and cause.]
This cause came on regularly for trial, upon notice duly given, before department two of the above-entitled court, Hon. M. H. Hyland presiding, without a jury, a jury trial having been expressly waived by all parties, the plaintiff being represented by its attorneys, Thomas E. Clark and H. L. Partridge, and the defendants being represented by their attorneys, W. N. Rutherford, W. A. Beasly, and H. Ray Fry, and oral and documentary evidence having been introduced by all the parties, and the cause having been argued and submitted for decision on briefs filed by all the parties hereto, and the court being fully advised in the premises, and having filed its findings of fact and conclusions of law; now, therefore, in accordance with said findings and conclusions, it is hereby
Ordered, adjudged, and decreed, that plaintiff take nothing by reason of its said complaint, and that defendants have judgment against the plaintiff dissolving the restraining order or temporary injunction heretofore issued in this action, and for their costs.
Dated October 11, 1907.
M. H. Hyland,
Judge of the Superior Court.
For count in complaint for damages joined with count praying for injunction to restrain unlawful diversion of the waters of a river, see ch. LXXXII, form No. 592.
For allegation as to acts of defendant causing irreparable damage and injury to the plaintiff, see ch. LXXXII, paragraph 22, form No. 592.
Form of petition for an injunction against the defendants seeking to restrain the enforcement of a judgment: Little v. Evans, 41 Kan. 578, 21 Pac. 630.
Form of petition in an action to enjoin defendant from using materials injurious to plaintiff's crops, and for damages: Fogarty v. Junction City Pressed Brick Co., 50 Kan. 482, 31 Pac. 1052, 18 L. R. A. 756.
Form of petition in an action in equity to enjoin and restrain defendant from changing the grade of streets and an alley, in pursuance of its ordinances, until the
damage sustained by plaintiff to its property by reason thereof is adjusted: MacMurray-Judge Architectural Iron Co. v. City of St. Louis, 138 Mo. 608, 39 S. W. 467.
Form of petition in an action to restrain the sale of property for alleged illegal taxes upon personal property: Bartlett v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., 32 Kan. 134, 4 Pac. 178.
Form of petition for an injunction, and for damages against defendant for digging up trees, injuring buildings, etc., on plaintiff's premises: Johns v. Schmidt, 32 Kan. 383, 4 Pac. 872.
Form of petition filed by an attorney-general seeking an injunction restraining the unlawful sale of liquor: Koester v. State, 36 Kan. 27, 12 Pac. 339.
Form of complaint in an action by the owner of a sawmill to abate obstructions in a stream which delay its logs in floating down the stream, and for damages: The A. C. Conn Co. v. Little Suamico Lumber etc. Co., 55 Wis. 580, 13 N. W. 464.
Form of complaint for an injunction to restrain or prevent the flooding of plaintiff's property by water from defendant's reservoir: Sylvester v. Jerome, 19 Colo. 128, 34 Pac. 760.
Form of complaint for an injunction by a corporation plaintiff, in aid of the preservation of certain personal property upon which plaintiff holds a chattel mortgage: Bank of Ukiah v. Moore, 106 Cal. 673, 39 Pac. 1071.
Form of complaint for an injunction to restrain the husband from interfering with the wife's separate property: Woffenden v. Woffenden, 1 Ariz. 328, 331, 25 Pac. 666.
For substance of complaint in an action to enjoin maintenance of a dam which, by reason of overflows, etc., causes injury to the plaintiff, and for damages, etc., see Wilhite v. Billings etc. Co., 39 Mont. 1, 101 Pac. 168.
Form of demurrer in a proceeding for an injunction to prevent the sale of a homestead: Pierson v. Truax, 15 Colo. 224, 25 Pac. 183, 184.
Form of answer in an action in equity to enjoin the directors of a levee district from proceeding under chapter 101 of the Revised Statutes (Mo.) to construct a levee in said district: Morrison v. Morey, 146 Mo. 553, 48 S. W. 629, 631.
Form of undertaking on injunction in an action upon an injunction bond: Sherman v. County Commissioners, 9 Colo. App. 155, 47 Pac. 973.
Form of decree in an action to enjoin maintenance of dam: Paragoonah Field etc. Co. v. Edwards, 9 Utah 477, 35 Pac. 487, 488.
For the substance of forms in a proceeding to restrain a resident of the state of Colorado from prosecuting a personal action instituted by him in the courts of another state against a citizen of his own state, but at all times residing in Colorado, and where the matters attempted to be litigated have theretofore been adjudicated and settled in and by the courts of Colorado, see O'Haire v. Burns, 45 Colo. 432, 101 Pac. 755, 132 Am. St. Rep. 191, 25 L. R. A. (N. S.) 267.
Action to enjoin defendant city from enforcing certain ordinances which prohibit the use of sidewalk space in the city for the sale of fruits, books, or other merchandise, and the erection or maintenance upon such sidewalks of any booth, shed, stand, or other construction. Case submitted upon stipulation of facts set out at length in the decision: Chapman v. City of Lincoln, 84 Neb. 534, 121 N. W. 596-599.
§ 427. ANNOTATIONS.-Injunction.
1. Nature of remedy.
2, 3. Rights protected by statute not abridged.
4, 5. "Plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law" precludes injunction.
6. Where the remedy is by action of ejectment.
7-9. Remedy as against party not a trespasser.
10. When injunction will not lie.-Absence of substantial injury. Jury's Pl.-106.