Randall v. . Carpenter
New York Court of Appeals
These are cross appeals from an order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first j ndicial department, made October 28, 1881, which affirmed an order of Special Term, fixing the damages sustained ■ by defendant by reason of a temporary injunction order granted herein, and payable by the sureties on the undertaking given on the granting of such order.
Read the full summary
These are cross appeals from an order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first j ndicial department, made October 28, 1881, which affirmed an order of Special Term, fixing the damages sustained ■ by defendant by reason of a temporary injunction order granted herein, and payable by the sureties on the undertaking given on the granting of such order. This action was brought to obtain an adjudication among other' things to the effect that plaintiff was the absolute owner of one-half of a share of the “ St. Omer Hotel,” standing in the name of defendant Josiah Carpenter, and that he…
1Opinion of the CourtDanforth, J.
The defendant’s appeal relates only to the disallowance of fees paid or estimated for other services than those made necessary hy the injunction, and is thus brought directly within the case of Newton v. Russell (Court of Appeals, January 24, 1882). * It must therefore -fail. The plaintiff’s appeal must succeed. .The injunction was temporary and there was no prayer for its continuance as part of the final relief sought in the action. The services for which compensation has been allowed were rendered in a vain effort to show cause why “ an injrmction should not be granted.” Having been thus…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Mitchell v. HawleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Curtiss v. BachmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Jackson v. MillspaughSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Sweet v. MowryNew York Supreme Court · 1893
- Whiteside v. Noyac Cottage Ass'nNew York Supreme Court · 1895
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.