From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilliam v. Randall

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Feb 8, 1926
132 A. 286 (Pa. 1926)

Opinion

January 26, 1926.

February 8, 1926.

Appeals — Refusal of preliminary injunction — Equity — Discretion of court — Abuse.

An appellate court will not reverse a decree refusing to issue a preliminary injunction, where the record fails to show an abuse of discretion.

Argued January 26, 1926.

Appeal, No. 134, Jan. T., 1926, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., March T., 1923, No. 6043, refusing preliminary injunction, in case of Lloyd V. Gilliam and Edna M. Gilliam v. Harry L. Randall.

Before MOSCHZISKER, C. J., FRAZER, WALLING, SIMPSON, KEPHART and SADLER, JJ. Affirmed.

Bill for injunction. Before AUDENRIED, P. J.

Preliminary injunction refused. Plaintiffs appealed.

Error assigned was decree, quoting record.

Thomas B. Hall, with him Alvin L. Levi, for appellants.

W. Horace Hepburn, Jr., for appellee.


This is an appeal from the refusal to issue a preliminary injunction; the record fails to show a plain abuse of discretion, and under such circumstances we do not disturb the decree: for authorities see Lesher v. Gassner Co., 285 Pa. 43.

The decree is affirmed at cost of appellants.


Summaries of

Gilliam v. Randall

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Feb 8, 1926
132 A. 286 (Pa. 1926)
Case details for

Gilliam v. Randall

Case Details

Full title:Gilliam et ux., Appellants, v. Randall

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Feb 8, 1926

Citations

132 A. 286 (Pa. 1926)
132 A. 286

Citing Cases

Trainer v. Internat'l Alliance

The court below refused the preliminary injunction for the reasons that (1) appellant failed to exhaust the…

Kaufman v. Philadelphia

" The court below held that the uniforms were not "articles of personal property for the use of" the…