E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Hem Research, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• denying motion for preliminary injunction to enjoin payment of dividends when moving party’s “only possible interest” in the money was as a source of possible future money judgment
• denying motion for preliminary injunction to enjoin payment of dividends when moving party’s “only possible interest” in the money was as a source of possible future money judgment
• rejecting injunction in part because “its sole function and effect would be to freeze [Defendants’] assets in place to make them available to satisfy any money judgment that [Plaintiffs] would obtain if it were to prevail.”
• refusing to issue an injunction as a means of prejudgment attachment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).