Sinclair Refining Co. v. Schwartz
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice Bok,
The court below, at plaintiff’s behest, entered a preliminary injunction.
This confronts us with the familiar rule of review, that on appeal from the refusal, grant or continuance of a preliminary injunction we will seek only apparent reasonable grounds for the action and will not consider the merits or the reasons unless it is plain that no grounds for it exist or that the rules of law relied on are palpably wrong or clearly inapplicable : Lindenfelser v. Lindenfelser, 385 Pa. 342 (1956), 123 A. 2d 626.
Plaintiff manufactures, refines, and sells petroleum products,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. ZasloffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Lindenfelser v. LindenfelserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Bristol-Myers Co. v. Lit Bros., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Burche Co. v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
- Lentheric, Inc. v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Bogosian v. Gulf Oil Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1973
- Fiumara v. Texaco, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1962
- House of Seagram, Inc. v. Assam Drug Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. MaysSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Gillette Co. v. White Cross Discount Centers, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1962
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.