Christie v. Griffing
New Jersey Court of Chancery
This suit is brought to restrain the defendant from violating an agreement, which the complainant alleges was made between them. On the filing of the bill and its accompanying affidavits, an injunction was ordered. The defendant answered, denying the agreement. Eeplication was filed, and the parties have proceeded to take testimony. The proof on the part of the complainant is all in. The defendant now moves to dissolve the injunction, on the bill and answer alone.
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
This case is, in its nature, one in which the court would be loth to dissolve the injunction on the mere denial of the complainant’s equity, by the defendant, in his answer. I am, therefore, the more unwilling to entertain this motion, at this stage of the cause. Were I to do so, and dissolve the injunction on the allegations of .the parties, as contained in the pleadings, I might, on the hearing, conclude, upon the *77evidence, that I ought to renew it and make it absolute. I, therefore, will not disturb it until the cause shall have been heard.
The great question of the cause is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Orr v. LittlefieldU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Hampshire · 1845