Opinion

Troutman v. . Shuford

  • 206 N.C. 909
  • 174 S.E. 230
  • 1934 N.C. LEXIS 349
Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Filed
Apr 11, 1934
Status
Published
On the bench
PER CURIAM.
Cited by
3 cases
Authority
More cited than 53.9%

The opinion

Peb Cubxam.

Tbis is an action for injunctive relief brought by plaintiffs against defendants. A temporary restraining order was issued by the judge below and at the hearing, the court below dissolved the restraining order. In this, we think there was error.

In

Seip v. Wright,

173 N. C., 14 (15-16), is the following: “Where it will not harm the defendant to continue the injunction, and may cause great injury to the plaintiff, if it is dissolved, the court generally will restrain the party until the hearing.

McCorkle v. Brem,

76 N. C., 407 ; where serious questions were raised,

Harrington v. Rawls,

131 N. C., 40 ; or where reasonably necessary to protect plaintiff’s rights,

Heilig v. Stokes,

63 N. C., 612 . . . . On a similar question, in

Hyatt v. DeHart,

140 N. C., 270 , the

Chief Justice

said: ‘Ordinarily, the findings of fact by the judge below are conclusive on appeal. While this is not true as to injunction cases, in which we look into and review the evidence on appeal, still there is the presumption always that the judgment and proceedings below are correct, and the burden is upon the appellant to assign and show error.’ ”

We think on the whole record, the restraining order should not have been dissolved.

Woltz v. Safe Deposit Co., ante,

239;

Whitaker v. Chase, ante,

335. The judgment of the court below is

Reversed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.