Lowe v. Board of Commissioners
C. F. Lowe and Wife and Others v. the Board of Commissioners of Davidson County.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Bysum, J.
The injunctive relief, sought in this action, is not auxiliary to another and main relief, but is the main relief itself, and the object of the action, therefore, the dissolution of the injunction would be equivalent to a dismissal of the action. In such cases where a reasonable doubt exists in the mind of the Court, whether the equity of the complaint is sufficiently negatived by the answer, the Court will not dissolve the injunction, but continue to the hearing. Much must depend upon the sound discretion of the Court to whom the question of dissolution is preferred.
James v. Lemley, 2 Ired. Eq. 278 ;
Miller v. Washburne, 3 Ired. Eq. 161 . In this case the answer does not remove such reasonable doubt, created by the complaint and affidavit, without which removal, according to the principles of this Court, the injunction ought not to be dissolved before the hearing. The novel and important questions raised by the pleadings and ably discussed before ns, do not come up for decision now.
Per CueiaM. Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.