Vail v. Osburn

Citations

• 174 Pa. 580
• 34 A. 315
• 1896 Pa. LEXIS 928

Syllabus

<p>Equity — Jurisdiction—Specific performance.</p> <p>A contract to cut and deliver bark to the owners of a tannery from trees in proximity to the tannery may be specifically enforced by a court of equity, when it appears that the supply of bark in the vicinity is limited, and loss of the bark specified in the contract would cause irreparable loss to the tannery.</p> <p>Equity — Service of process — Act of April 6, 1859, sec. 1, P. L. 387.</p> <p>Where a court of equity has jurisdiction of the subject-matter of a contract, but some of the defendants, nonresidents of the county, have not been regularly served with process, on account of the order of court not following the requirements of the act of April 6, 1859, the defect in the order may be corrected after a preliminary injunction has been granted and continued, and an answer filed.</p> <p>Equity — Preliminary injunction — Specific performance.</p> <p>On a bill for the specific performance of a contract to sell bark to the owners of a tannery, the bill charged that the defendants had refused to cany out the contract. The' court granted a preliminary injunction to restrain the defendants from selling and delivering bark to other parties, and this injunction was subsequently continued. After the date of the order continuing the injunction, a third party who claimed that the defendants had sold the bark to him, intervened in the case. Held, that the decree continuing the injunction should be affirmed.'</p>