Case ID: pa_264/html/0515-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bailey et al. v. Young Women’s Christian Assn. et al., Appellants.
    
      Equity — Preliminary injunction — Maintaining status quo — Appeal.
    
    Where there is apparently sufficient ground for the action of the court below in awarding a preliminary injunction it will not be disturbed on appeal; the status quo will be preserved until final hearing.
    Argued March 25, 1919.
    Appeal, No. 288, Jan. T., 1919, by defendants, from decree of C. P. No. 5, Philadelphia Co., Sept. T., 1918, No. 1563, awarding preliminary injunction in case of Elsie Bailey et al. v. Young Women’s Christian Association of Philadelphia et al.
    Before Brown, C. J., Moschzisker, Frazer, Walking and Kephart, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Bill in equity for an injunction to restrain defendants from preventing the plaintiffs from voting at a corporate election, and for the appointment of a master to supervise such election. Before Staake and Monaghan, JJ.
    The court awarded a preliminary injunction and appointed a master. Defendants appealed.
    
      Error assigned was the decree of the court.
    
      Theodore F. Jenkins, with him WilKam H. Peace, for appellants.
    
      Benjamin O. Frick, for appellees.
    April 28, 1919:
   Per Curiam,

Where there is apparently sufficient ground for the action of the court below in awarding a preliminary injunction it will not be disturbed on appeal; the status quo will be preserved until final hearing: Gemmell et al. v. Fox et al., 241 Pa. 146. It not appearing that the present appeal ought to be made an exception to this rule, it is dismissed at the costs of the appellants.