Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Hansen v. Edwards

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided April 21, 1967No. 5309Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

*194Collins,

concurring in part, dissenting in part:

I concur with the majority that the trial court by granting the preliminary injunction decided only that die covenant was valid and reserved the question of reasonableness to the trial on the merits. However, I do not agree that a review of the record of the hearing pertaining to the granting of the injunction now permits us to fix, as a matter of law, the reasonableness of the restraint either as to time or space. This appeal is from the propriety of the granting of the injunction, not a determination of the reasonableness of the covenant on the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Solen v. Virginia & Truckee RailroadNevada Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Blinn v. Hutterische Society of Wolf CreekMontana Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Sutton v. . SuttonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  4. Phenix v. FramptonNevada Supreme Court · 1907

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

Powered by the Exa API