clear space clear space clear space white space
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Bland's Reports, Chancery Court 1809-1832
Volume 201, Page 594   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
clear space clear space clear space white space

694 HILL v. BOWIE.

is an attendant upon the action at common law; and, as its inse-
parable ally, follows its fortunes, and must submit to its fate, (a)
The restriction of this kind of injunction, in its commencement,
must, from its nature, be coextensive with the pretensions of the
plaintiff as made in his bill in equity and action at common law.
But if, in that action, the plaintiff fails to recover entirely accord-
ing to his pretensions, the injunction can be perpetuated to the
extent of his recovery only and no further; and upon the same
principle, if the plaintiff fails in his action at law altogether, the
injunction must be totally dissolved.

In this case it does not distinctly appear, by the proceedings,
how far the plaintiff has failed in sustaining his pretensions at law.
The defendant by his answer, which is to be taken for true in this
mode of submitting the case on bill and answer, avers that the
judgment at law does not ascertain the plaintiff's pretensions to
be as extensive as in his bill it would appear he supposes. Hence
although it must be taken for true, that there is some difference
between the extent of the plaintiff's pretensions, which he asked
to have protected by an injunction, and his actual recovery, yet
that difference is in no manner designated by this vague allegation
of the defendant, or by any thing to be found in the proceedings.
If the unequivocal extent of the future operation of this injunction
be of the importance the parties now seem to consider it, the exact
extent of the plaintiff's pretensions, as established by his judgment
at law, should have been clearly and distinctly shewn to this court
to enable it to limit the injunction accordingly. But a judgment
in the general terms that this appears to be, must, without some
equally authentic evidence to the contrary, be taken as sufficiently
shewing, that the injunction should continue to operate to the full
extent of its original scope.

Whereupon it is decreed, that the injunction heretofore granted
in this case be and the same is hereby made perpetual; and that
the said defendant pay unto the said plaintiff the costs of this suit
to be taxed by the register.

(a) Duvall v. Waters, ante, 569.


clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Bland's Reports, Chancery Court 1809-1832
Volume 201, Page 594   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  

This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.

Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!

An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives