Sneath v. Lehsten
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Perskie, J.
We think that the order requires modification.
First — It is the well established rule that a preliminary injunction should not issue unless there be urgent necessity ; nor if the facts necessary to entitle complainant to relief are controverted under oath; nor if the right is not clear as a matter of law. Citizens Coach Co. v. Camden Horse Railroad Co. (Court of Errors and Appeals. 1878), 29 N. J. Eq. 299; Kellett v. Local No. 274., &c., Canada (Court of Errors and Apeals, 1933); 114. N. J. Eq. 107, 109; A. Hollander & Son, Inc., v. Jos.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Jacobson v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Lochner v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Kilbourn v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Addyston Pipe & Steel Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- General Electric Co. v. Gem Vacuum StoresNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1955
- Light v. National Dyeing Printing Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1947
- New Chancellor Cinema, Inc. v. Town of IrvingtonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1979
- State v. JenningsNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1941
- Vim Elec. v. Retail, Local 830New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1940