From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U. E. R. M. W. v. Sherman

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Apr 10, 1945
41 A.2d 860 (Pa. 1945)

Opinion

March 21, 1945.

April 10, 1945.

Appeals — When premature — Preliminary injunctions — Hearing — Equity Rules.

An appeal by defendant from the granting of a preliminary injunction on plaintiff's ex parte affidavits, taken within five days after its entry, will be dismissed as premature.

Argued March 21, 1945.

Before MAXEY, C. J., DREW, LINN, STERN, PATTERSON and JONES, JJ.

Appeal, No. 89, March T., 1945, from order of C. P., Allegheny Co., April T., 1945, No. 1072, in case of United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America et al. v. Harry Alan Sherman et al. Appeal dismissed; reargument refused May 21, 1945.

Bill in equity. Before SMART, J.

Preliminary injunction granted. Motion by defendants to dissolve injunction refused. Defendants appealed.

Harry Alan Sherman, for appellants.

David Olbum, with him Sylvan Libson, for appellees.


The defendants having taken an appeal within the five-day period following the granting of the preliminary injunction by the court below in the above-entitled matter on affidavits filed by the plaintiff, ex parte, and having thus rendered impossible the hearing fixed by the court pursuant to Equity Rule No. 38, the appeal is dismissed as premature and the matter returned to the court below in order that a hearing, as contemplated by the Equity Rules, may be had forthwith; costs to be paid by appellants.


Summaries of

U. E. R. M. W. v. Sherman

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Apr 10, 1945
41 A.2d 860 (Pa. 1945)
Case details for

U. E. R. M. W. v. Sherman

Case Details

Full title:United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America et al. v. Sherman…

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Apr 10, 1945

Citations

41 A.2d 860 (Pa. 1945)
41 A.2d 860

Citing Cases

Youngstown Industrial & Development Corporation v. Hillcrest Shopping Center

However, such an order has not as yet been entered. In this respect, the appeal is premature. See, West v.…

Rupel v. Bluestein

The record supports appellant's assertion that at the October 6 hearing he agreed only to the continuance of…