Opinion
September 27, 1932.
November 28, 1932.
Appeals — Preliminary injunctions.
The general rule is that, on appeals from preliminary injunctions granted by the lower court, the Supreme Court will not interfere except in cases entirely free from doubt.
Before FRAZER, C. J., SIMPSON, KEPHART, SCHAFFER, MAXEY, DREW and LINN, JJ.
Appeal, No. 100, March T., 1932, by John A. Berkey, from decrees of C. P. Somerset Co., Feb. T., 1932, No. 2, in equity, granting preliminary injunction, refusing to dissolve same, and continuing injunction, in case of Peter Hoffman v. Johnstown Somerset Ry. Co. and John A. Berkey. Affirmed.
Bill for accounting, and injunction restraining proceedings on execution. Before BOOSE, P. J.
The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.
Decrees granting preliminary injunction, refusing to dissolve same, and continuing same until further order of court.
Defendant, John A. Berkey, appealed.
Errors assigned were decrees, quoting record.
Clarence L. Shaver, with him John A. Berkey, for appellant.
E. O. Kooser, of Kooser Courtney, for appellee.
Argued September 27, 1932.
Our general rule is that on appeals from granting preliminary injunctions by the lower court, we will not interfere except in cases entirely free from doubt: Lesher v. Gassner Co., 285 Pa. 43; Commonwealth v. Katz, 281 Pa. 287. We are not convinced that this is such a case, and consequently will dismiss the appeal, without considering at length the merits of the controversy involved; these may appear quite differently when the case is fully developed upon hearing.
Appeal dismissed.