Legal Opinion

Edmisten, Attorney General v. Challenge, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided November 17, 1981No. 8110SC195PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK, Judge.

The sole question before this Court is whether the trial court erred in granting the preliminary injunction, the defendants having elected to appeal before the ultimate questions raised by the pleadings are decided at the trial on the merits. Ordinarily, a preliminary injunction will be granted pending trial on the merits, (1) if there is probable cause for supposing that plaintiff will be able to sustain his primary equity, and (2) if there is reasonable apprehension of irreparable loss unless injunctive relief be granted, or if in the court’s opinion it appears reasonably…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Kugler v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1972
  2. Travenol Laboratories, Inc. v. TurnerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
  3. Pruitt v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  4. Ackerman v. Tri-City Geriatric & Health Care, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  5. State Ex Rel. Turner v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1971

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Kaplan v. Prolife Action League of GreensboroCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
  2. State Ex Rel. Corbin v. Challenge, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
  3. People Ex Rel. Hartigan v. Dynasty System Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1984
  4. Kavry v. Herbalife International of AmericaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2003
  5. State Ex Rel. Miller v. American Professional Marketing, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1986

7 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