Legal Opinion

Sanders v. De Lucia

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided June 20, 1967No. 503, Docket 31371PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The order of the district court denying plaintiff’s motion for a temporary injunction is affirmed. It is clear that the issuance of the requested injunction would result in greater harm to the defendants than the harm which plaintiff would suffer by reason of failure to issue the injunction. See Schenker v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 304 F.2d 880 (2d Cir. 1962); Nalco Chemical Co. v. Hall, 347 F.2d 90 (5th Cir. 1965).

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Nalco Chemical Company v. Merwin G. HallCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1965
  2. Schenker v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Service Employees International Union, Afl-Cio, Clc v. Local 1199 N.E., Seiu, Afl-Cio, ClcCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
  2. Sanders v. De LuciaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967