Ford v. Taylor

Citations

• 140 F. 356
• 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4795

Syllabus

<p>1. Preliminary Injunction — Motion for Dissolution. .</p> <p>There is no inflexible rule under the authorities as to the measure of new evidence required to entitle a defendant to the dissolution of a preliminary injunction, but each case must be decided on its own peculiar facts.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 27, Cent. Dig. Injunction, § 387.]</p> <p>2. Same — Effect of Answer as Denial.</p> <p>Keeping in view that the purpose of a preliminary injunction is to preserve rights claimed until their adjudication, such an injunction ought not to be dissolved on an answer which is evasive as to any of the material allegations of the bill; nor does a full denial of the equities of the bill entitle the defendant to a dissolution as a matter of right, but the matter is within the sound discretion of the court.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 27, Cent. Dig. Injunction, §§ 376-383.]</p> <p>3. Same — Proofs.</p> <p>To warrant a court in continuing a preliminary injunction in a suit for specific performance of a contract, it is not necessary that it should be clear that complainant will succeed at the hearing; but it is sufficient if there is reasonable ground for supposing that relief may be given.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 27, Cent. Dig. Injunction, § 358.]</p> <p>4. Evidence — Weight—Number of Witnesses.</p> <p>A preponderance in number of witnesses does not establish a preponderance in weight of evidence, especially where the testimony is ex parte by affidavits.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 20, Cent. Dig. Evidence, § 2450.]</p>