Hamilton Watch Co. v. Benrus Watch Co., Inc

How courts have described this case

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

• stating a preliminary injunction “serves as an equitable policing measure to prevent the parties from harming one another during the litigation; to keep the parties, while the suit goes on, as far as possible in the respective positions they occupied when the suit began”
• stating a preliminary injunction “serves as an equitable policing measure to prevent the parties from harming one another during the litigation; to keep the parties, while the suit goes on, as far as possible in the respective positions they occupied when the suit began”
• “Where ... a final judgment has been entered on the merits, the preliminary injunction comes to an end and is superseded by the final order.”
• quoted in American Air Parcel Forwarding Co. v. United States, 1 CIT 293, 298 (1981)
• “For a preliminary injunction . . . is, by its very nature, interlocutory, tentative, provisional, ad interim, impermanent, mutable, not fixed or final or conclusive, characterized by its for-the-time-beingness.”
• “To justify a temporary injunction it is not necessary that the plaintiff’s right to a final decision, after a trial, be absolutely certain, wholly without doubt; if the other elements are present (i.e., the balance of hardships tips decidedly toward plaintiff

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).