Legal Opinion

Huskins v. Yancey Hospital, Inc.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 14, 1953PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtErvin, J.

Tbe appeal challenges tbe validity of tbe order of Judge Clement denying tbe application of tbe plaintiffs for an interlocutory injunction to enjoin tbe defendant from using tbe strip of land in dispute as a driveway until tbe conflicting claims of tbe parties to its ownership are determined by a trial on tbe merits. As a consequence, our decision must turn on tbe relevant rules which govern tbe granting or refusing of injunctions of this character. These rules are as follows:

1. the purpose of an interlocutory injunction is to preserve the status quo of the subject matter of the suit until a…

2Cases cited51 opinions

  1. State v. ScottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  2. Hyatt v. Dehart.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  3. State v. . ScottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  4. Boone v. . BooneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  5. Clinard v. LambethSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951

46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Casey v. GranthamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. Huskins v. Yancey HospitalSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Lohrmann v. Iredell Memorial Hospital Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  4. TRIANGLE LEASING CO., INC. v. McMahonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
  5. Board of Provincial Elders of the Southern Province of the Moravian Church v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968

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