Rickol v. Seaton

Citations

• 61 Pa. Super. 334
• 1915 Pa. Super. LEXIS 328

Syllabus

<p>Equity — Jurisdiction—Injunction—Remedy at law — Timber.</p> <p>A court of equity will not award an injunction restraining a defendant from cutting and removing timber where it appears that the timber in controversy had been sold by the plaintiff to the defendant under an entire contract, that the full consideration had all been paid at the time the contract was made, that, while an immediate removal of all the timber was .talked about, it was not made an important or controlling part of the bargain that all should be removed within any specified time, and that the defendant after having removed a portion of the timber delayed for several months before attempting to remove the remainder.</p> <p>The expression “immediate delivery” in such a contract is to be construed in the light of the circumstances, having due regard to the subject matter, its location the season and the difficulty of re^moval, and the like.</p> <p>The granting of an injunction is always the exercise of power to be cautiously used, and it should clearly appear that irreparable injury is likely to follow, and that there is no adequate remedy at law.</p>