injunction

The power to stay proceedings in another court appertains distinctively to equity in the enforcement of equitable principles, and the grant or refusal of such a stay by a court of equity of proceedings at law is a grant or refusal of an injunction within the meaning of section 129 as amended.

A prohibitory writ, issued by the authority of, and generally under the seal of, a court of equity, to restrain one or more of the defendants or parties, or quasi parties, to a suit or proceeding in equity, from doing, or from permitting his servants or others who are under his control to do, an act which is deemed to be unjust or inequitable so far as regards the rights of some other party or parties to such suit or proceedings in equity. Eden, Inj. c. 1; Jeremy, Eq. Jur. bk. 3, c. 2,§ 1; Story, Eq. Jur. § 861; Willard, Eq. Jur. 341; 4 Bouv. Insb. 120; 2 Green, Ch. (N. J.) 136; 1 Madd. 126. (1) Preliminary injunctions are used to restrain the party enjoined from doing or continuing to do the wrong complained of, either temporarily or during the continuance of the suit or proceeding in equity in which such injunction is granted, and before the rights of the parties have been definitely settled by the decision and decree of the court in such suit or proceeding. (2) Final or perpetual injunctions are awarded, or directed to be issued, or the preliminary injunction already issued is made final or perpetual, by the final decree of the court, or when the rights of the parties so far as relates to the subject of the injunction are finally adjudicated and disposed of by the decision and the order or decree of the court, 2 Freem. Ch. 106; 4 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 69; 3 Yerg. (Tenn.) 366; 1 Bibb (Ky.) 184; 4 Bouv. Inst. 123. In England, injunctions were divided into "common injunctions" and "special injunctions," Eden. Inj. (3d Am. Ed.) 178, note; Willard, Eq. Jur. 342; Saxt. (N. J.) equity was in default for not entering his appearancei or for not putting in his answer to the complainant's bill within the time prescribed by the practice of the court. Eden, Inj. (3d Am. Ed.) 59-61, 68-72, 93, note; Story, Eq. Jur. § 892; 18 Ves. 523; Jeremy, Eq. Jur. bk. 3, c. 2, § 1, p. 339; Gilb. For. Rom. 194; Newby, Chanc. Prac. c. 4, § 7. Special injunctions were founded upon the oath of the complainant, or other evidence of the truth of the charges contained in his bill of complaint. They were obtained upon a special application to the court, or to the officer of the court who was authorized to allow the issuing of such injunctions, and usually upon notice of such application given to the party whose proceedings were sought to be enjoined. Story, Eq. Jur, § 892; 4 Eden, Inj. 78, 290; Jeremy, Eq. Jur. 339, 341, 342; 3 Mer. 475; 18 Ves. 522, 523. In the United States courts, and in the equity courts of most of the states of the Union, the English practice of granting the common injunction has been discontinued or superseded, either by statute or by the rules of the courts. And the preliminary injunctions are therefore all special injunctions in the courts of this country, where such English practice has been superseded. INJURIA ABSQUE (or SINE) DAMNO. Wrong without damage; an actionable wrong not resulting in any legal damage. The doctrine of injuria absque damno applies only in those cases where, though there was a wrongful act, it did not amount to an invasion of a substantial right, the tendency of modern law being to presume nominal damages from every infraction of a legal right, though no actual damage result. Whether nominal damages will be presumed, or the rule of injuria absque damno applied, depends on the disposition of the court to invoke the maxim "de minimis," etc. See 75 Cal. 182; 30 Vt. 443. And this will be done generally, only where the right infringed was in itself trivial, as where an officer, on attaching hay, used for a few moments, without leave, a fork belonging to the attachment debtor, and then returned it uninjured. 22 Vt. 231. See Sedgw. Dam. § 96; Suth. Dam. § 3; "Nominal Damages." INJURIA FIT El CUI CONVICIUM DICtum est, vel de eo factum carmen famosum. An injury is done to him of whom a reproachful thing is said, or concerning whom an infamous song is made. 9 Coke, 60.

A prohibitory writ, issued by the authority and generally under the seal of a court of e(iuity, to restrain one or more of the defendants or parties or quasi parties to a suit or proceeding in equity, from doing, or from permitting his servants or others who are under his control to do, an act which is deemed to be inequitable so far as regards the rights of some other party or parties to such suit or proceedings in equity. Eden, Inj. c. 1; Kerr, Inj. 9; Jeremy, Eq. Jur. b. 3, c. 2, § 1; Story, Eq. Jur. § 861; Will. Eq. Jur. 341; 2 Green, Ch. 136; 1 Madd. 126. The writ of injunction may be regarded as the correlation of the writ of mandamus, lawful act, the other requiring the performance of a lawful or neglected act; Beach, Inj; § 9. Under the present practice in England, Injunction is not by writ, but the order of the court has the same effect The interdict of the Roman law resembles, in many respects, our injunction. It was used in three distinct but cognate senses. 1. It was^ applied to signify the edicts made by the proetor, declaratory of his intention to give a remedy in certain cases, chiefly to preserve or to restore possession; this interdiet was called edlctal: edictale, quod prw~ to Hi edictis proponitur, ut aciant omnea ea forma poase implurari, 2. It was used to signify his order or decree, applying the remed/ in the given case before him, and was then called decretal: decretale, quod preetor re nata implorantihua decrevit. It is this which bears a strong resemblance to the injunction of a court of equity. 3. It was used, in the last place, to signify the very remedy sought in the suit commenced under the prajtor’s edict; and thus it became the denomination of the action itself. Livingston on the Batture case; 2 Story, Eq. Jur. § 805. Mandatory injunctions command the defendant to do a particular thing. Preventive, commands him to refrain from an act. The former are resorted to rarely and are seldom allowed before a final hearing; Corning v. Nall Factory, 40 N. Y. 191; Audeuried v. R. Co., 08 Pa. 370, 8 Am. Rep. 195; 10 Vcs. 192: 20 Am. Dec. 389, note; Bailey v. Schnitzius, 45 N. J. Eq. 178, 13 Atl. 247, 16 Atl. CSO. They are not granted except to prevent a failure of justice and then only when the right is clearly established; Buettgenbach v. Gerbig, 2 Neb. (unof.) 889, 90 N. W. 654; Budd V. Camden Horse R. Co., 63 N. J. Eq. 804, 62 Atl. 1130, affirming 61 N. J. Eq. 543, 48 Atl. 1028; nor where there is unreasonable delay in the application; Mac Kintyre v, Jones, 0 Pa. Super. Ct. 543. Preliminary or interlocutory injunctions are used to restrain the party enjoined from doing or continuing to do the wrong complained of, either temporarily or during the continuance of the suit or proceeding in equity in which such 'injunction is granted, and before the rights of the parties have been settled by the decree of the court in such suit or proceeding. The sole object of a preliminary injunction is to preserve the status quo until the merits can be heard. The status quo is the last actual peaceable uncontested status which preceded the pending controversy, and a wrongdoer cannot shelter himself behind a sudden or recently changed status, though made before the chancellor’s hand actually reached him; Fredericks v. Huber, 180 Pa. 672, 87 Atl. 90. See Rb- STBAINIMG ObDER. inary injunction already issued is made final or perpetual, by the final decree of the CQqrt, or when the rights of the parties so far as relates to the subject of the injunction are finally adjudicated and disposed of by the order or decree of the court; 2 Freem. Ch. 106; Caruthers v. Hartsfleld, 3 Yerg. (Tenn.) 366, 24 Am. Dec. 580; Kruson v. Kruson, 1 Bibb (Ky.) 184; Kerr, Inj. *12. In England, injimctions were divided into common injunctions and special injunctions; Eden, Inj. 178, n.; Will. Eq. Jur. 342. The common injunction was obtained of course when the defendant in the suit in equity was in default for not entering his appearance, or for not putting in’ his answer to the complainant’s bill within the times prescribed by the practice of the court; Story, Eq. Jur. § 892; 18 Ves. 523; Jeremy, Eq. Jur. Special Injunctions were founded upon the oath of the complainant, or other evidence of the truth of the charges contained in his bill of complaint. They were obtained upon a special application, and usually upon notice of such application given to the party whose proceedings were sought to be enjoined; Story, Eq. Jur. § 892; Jeremy, Eq. Jur. 339; 18 Ves. 522. In the federal courts and in the equity courts of most of the states the English practice of granting the common injunction has been discontinued or superseded, either by statute or by rujes of the courts; the preliminary injunctions are, therefore, all special injunctions in the courts of this country where such English practice has been superseded. When used. The Injunction is used in a great variety of cases, of which cases the following are some of the most common: to stay proceedings at law by the party enjoined; Albritton v. Bird, R. M. Charlt. (Ga.) 93; Lyles v. Ilalton, 6 Gill & J. (Md.) 122; Bell V. Cunningham, 1 Sumn. 89, Fed. Cas. No. 1,246; Gridley. v. Wynant, 23 How, (U. S.) 600, 16 L. Ed. 411; Monson v. Lawrence, 27 Conn. 579; Frith v. Roe, 23 Ga. 139; to restrain the transfer of stocks, of promissory notes, bills of exchange, and other evidences of debt; Story, Eq. Jur. §§ 906, 955; 2 Vern. 122; Osborn v. Bank, 9 Wheat. (U. S.) 738, 6 L, Ed. 204; Jones v. Edwards, 57 N. C. 257; Bums v. Weesner, 134 Ind. 442, 34 'N. B. 10; to restrain the transfer of the title to property; Morris Canal & Banking Co. v. Mayor, etc., 12 N. J. Eq. 262; Gayle v. Fattle, 14 Md, 69; Stringham v. Brown, 7 la. 33; Conant v. Warren, 6 Gray (Mass.) 662; Lee v. Simpson, 37 Fed. 12, 2

A prohibitive writ issued by a court of equity, at the suit of a party complainant, directed to a party defendant in the action or to a party made/a defendant for that purpose, forbidding the latter to do some act or to permit his servants or agents to do some act, which he ls threatening or attempting to commit or restraining him in the continuance thereof, such act being unjust and inequitable, injurious to the plaintiff, and not such.as can be adequately redressed by an action at law U. S. v. Haggerty (C. C.) 116 Fed. 515; Dupre v. Anderson, 45 La. Ann. 1134, 13 South. 743; City of Alma v. Loehr, 42 Kan. 368, 22 Pac. 424. An injunction is a writ or order requiring a person to refrain from a particular act. It may be granted by the court in which the action is brought, or by a judge thereof, and when made by a judge it may be enforced as an order of the court. Code Civ. Proc. Cal. § 525.

— Final injnnction. A final injunction is one granted when the rights of the parties are determined ; it may be made mandatory, (commanding acts to be done,) and ls distinguished from a preliminary injunction, which is confined to the purpose and office of simple prevention or restraining. Southern Pac R. Co., v. Oakland (C. Ct) 58 Fed. 54.

— Mandatory injnnction. One which
(1) commands the defendant to do some positive act or particular thing;
(2) prohibits him from refusing (or persisting in a refusal) to do or permit some act to which the plaintiff has a legal right; or
(3) restrains the defendant from permitting his previous wrongful act to continue operative, thus virtually compelling him to undo it, as by removing obstructions or erections, and restoring the plaintiff or the place or the subject-matter to the former condition. Bailey v. Schnitzius, 45 N. J. Eq. 178, 16 All. 680; Parsons v. Marye (C. C.) 23 Fed. 121; People v. McKane, 78 Hun, 154, 28 N. Y. Supp. 981; Procter v. Stuart, 4 Okl. 679, 46 Pac. 501.

— Permanent Injunction. One intended to remain in force until the final termination of the particular suit. Riggins v. Thompson, 96 Tex. 154, 71 S. W. 14.

— Perpetual injunction. Opposed to an injunction ad interim; an injunction which finally disposes of the suit, and is indefinite in point of time. Riggins v. Thompson, 96 Tex. 154, 71 S. W. 14; De Florez v. Raynolds, (C. Ct) 8 Fed. 438.

— Preliminary injunction. An injunction granted at the institution of a suit, to restrain the defendant from doing or continuing some act, the right to which is in dispute, and which may either be discharged or made per-pefual, according to the result of the controversy, as soon as the rights of the parties are determined. Darlington Oil Co., v. Pee Dee Oil Co.., 62 S. O. 196, 40 S. E. 169; Appeal of Mammoth Vein Co.nsol. Co.al Co.., 54 Pa. 188; Allison v. Corson, 88 Fed. 584, 32 C. C. A. 12; Jesse French Piano Co., v. Forbes, 134 Ala. 302, 32 South. 078, 92 Am. St. Rep. 31.

— Preventive injunction. One which prohibits the defendant from doing a particular act or commands him to refrain from it.

— Provisional injunction. Another name for a preliminary or temporary injunction or an injunction pendente lite.

— Special injunction. An injunction obtained only on motion and petition, usually with notice to the other party. Aldrich v. Kirkland, 6 Rich. Law (S. O.) 340. An injunction by which parties are restrained from committing waste, damage, or injury to property. 4 Steph. Comm. 12, note

— Temporary injunction. A preliminary or provisional injunction, or one granted pendente lite; as opposed to a final or perpetual injunction. Jesse French Piano Co. v. Porter, 134 Ala. 302, 32 South. 678, 92 Am. St. Rep. 81.

A prohibitory writ in the nature of an interdictum, in the civil law, granted by a court of equity in a variety of cases, to re- Mandatory injunction: an injunction allow the continuance of a thing, and to remove it. Perpetual or final as a means of permanent relief at the prohibiting the doing or continuing of nary or provisional Injunction: an ginning of a suit to restrain action on pe Tidente lite.

A prohibitive writ issued by a court of equity, at the suit of a party complainant, directed to a party defendant in the action, or to a party made a defendant for that purpose, forbidding the latter to do some act, or to permit his servants or agents todo some act, which he is threatening or attempting to comunit, or restraining him in the coutinuance thereof, such act being unjust and inequitable, injurious to the plaintiff, and not such as can be adequately redressed by an action at law. An injunction is a writ or order requiring a person to refrain from a particularact. It may be granted by the court in which the action is brought, or by a judge thereof, and when made by a judge it may be enforced as an order of the court. Code Civil Proc. Cal. § 525. Mandatory injunctions command defendant to do a particular thing. Preventive, command him to refrain from an act. An injunction is called “preliminary” or “provisional,” or an “injuaction pendente lite,” when itis granted at the outset of a suit brought for the purpose of restraining the defendant from doing the act threatened, until the suit has been heard and the rights of the parties determined. It is called “final” or “perpetual” when granted upon a hearing and adjudication of the rights in question, and as a measure of permanent relief,

A prohibitory forbidding a party to do injunction forbids a tinue, and amounts to a liminary or provisional a suit, or pendente suit has been determined; hibits the party forever existence of the thing, relief upon the end of granted on default.