Legal Opinion

Brinkley v. . Norman

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 16, 1925PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Cueiam.

This appeal is controlled by the principle announced in Seip v. Wright, 178 N. C., 14, and in many other cases: “Where it will not harm the defendant to continue the injunction and may cause great injury to the plaintiff, if it is dissolved, the court generally will restrain the party until the final hearing.”

The judgment is

Affirmed.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Latham v. . LathamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Huskins v. Yancey HospitalSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  2. Huskins v. Yancey Hospital, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Cullins v. . State CollegeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  4. Ferebee v. . ThomasonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  5. Holder v. Home Mortgage Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1933

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API