Legal Opinion

Fenno v. Primrose

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts

Decided May 15, 1902No. 1,580PublishedCited by 9 opinions

In Equity. On motion for interlocutory injunction.

1Opinion of the Court

PUTNAM, Circuit Judge.

This matter comes up on a motion for an interlocutory injunction restraining the prosecution of a suit at law relative to the same matters which the present bill covers. Whether or not a permanent injunction will lie against the suit at law depends, perhaps, entirely on the question whether this court has jurisdiction to proceed in equity on this bill. We would have no question on the present showing that, if we have such jurisdiction, the suit at law should be restrained by both interlocutory and final decrees to that effect. That suit relates to numerous consignments…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Root v. Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1882
  2. Fowle v. Lawrason'sSupreme Court of the United States · 1831

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. City of Boston v. DolanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  2. Western Union Tel. Co. v. American Bell Tel. Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1903
  3. Arbuckle v. Clifford F. Reid, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1931
  4. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland v. Fidelity Trust Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey · 1906
  5. Peters v. Equitable Life Assurance SocietyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1906

4 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