Bell v. . Chadwick
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a civil actioN, applying for an inj unction to restrain the defendants from working turpentine, &c., on a certain piece of land, heard by Ola/rk, J., at Chambers in Obaven county, Nov. 13th, 1873. The plaintiff alleged that he was the owner in fee of a certain tract of land in Craven county, describing it, and that the defendants trespassed upon a portion of it, destroying its value by getting turpentine, injuring the timber and committing waste generally.
Read the full summary
This was a civil actioN, applying for an inj unction to restrain the defendants from working turpentine, &c., on a certain piece of land, heard by Ola/rk, J., at Chambers in Obaven county, Nov. 13th, 1873. The plaintiff alleged that he was the owner in fee of a certain tract of land in Craven county, describing it, and that the defendants trespassed upon a portion of it, destroying its value by getting turpentine, injuring the timber and committing waste generally. He further charged, that the defendants are insolvent, and do not own enough property to make an exemption for one person ; that…
1Opinion of the CourtSettle, J.
The affidavit, upon which the injunction was obtained, is defective and insufficient. But assuming that the answer of the defendants waived that objection, we will consider the case upon its merits.
All the authorities say that Courts of equity are slow to move by inj unction to restrain trespass, and will never do so unless it is apparent that but for such interference, the injury will be irreparable, and where no redress can be obtained at law.
Of the many cases which have been before this Court seeking to restrain, by injunction, the working of turpentine orchards, few have been sustained,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Carney v. HadleySupreme Court of Florida · 1893
- Frink v. . StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886