570 INDEX.

INJUNCTION— Continued.

beyond the legitimate office of the process, or as possessing the
character of a judicial writ. III.

6. Where the material allegations of the bill are denied by" the answer, the
motion to disaolve must prevail, unless the bill can be supported by
testimony taken under the act of 1835, ch. 380, sec. 8. Ib.

7. All averments of the bill not denied by the answer, must, upon all ques-
tions relating to the injunction, be regarded as true. Ib.

8. An injunction can only be dissolved by positive contradictory averments
in the answer, and an answer founded on hearsay, is not sufficient to
remove the complainant's equity, though resting upon information de-
rived from others, it denies the 'facts out of which that equity arose.
Dovb vs. Bames, 127.

9* Upon motion to dissolve, credit can only be given to the answer, in so
far as it speaks of responsive matters, within the personal knowledge
of the defendant, and unless, so speaking, the equity of the bill is
sworn away, the injunction cannot be dissolved. Ib.

10. The object of an injunction to stay proceedings at law, either before
or after judgment, is to prevent the party against whom it issues, from
availing himself of an unfair advantage, resulting from accident, mis-
take, fraud or otherwise, and which would, therefore, be against con-
science. Little vs. Price, 189.

11. If such unfair advantage has been already obtained by proceeding to
judgment, the court will in like manner control the judgment, and re-
store the party to his original rights. Ib.

12. This can only be done by depriving his adversary of every advantage
which the judgment thus improperly obtained gives him, and cannot
be limited merely to restraining him from proceeding upon it at law.
Jb.

13. Hence an injunction commanding and enjoining the complainant to
cease from all proceedings on hif judgment recovered at law, was
held to operate to restrain him from proceeding in equity. Ib.

14. It is well settled by the Maryland decisions, that chancery will never
interfere with judgments at law, where the party's own default or ne-
glect has made an application to the latter tribunal necessary. Ib.

15. When the company refuses or neglects to pay for the land condemned
for'their use, the owner has a right to call upon this court to protect
by injunction his property from injury until the money is paid. Hsar-
ness vs. Chesapeoke and Ohio Canal Company, 249.

16. The power of this court to grant injunctions to restrain creditors from
proceeding at law, after a decree for an account, is not confined to
cases in which the application is made by the executor or administra-y
tor, but extends to applications made by the heir, or by another credi-
* tor, or a common legatee, or perhaps by a residuary legatee. Boyd fy
Hance vs. Harris, 466.

17. In order, however, to prevent abuse by conveyance between an execu-
tor or administrator, and a friendly creditor, the practice is to grant
an injunction only when the answer or affidavit of the executor or ad-