The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1910-11-10
NO WARRANT Fer The ORDER
Court Holds That Allegations of Pc
tition Are Answered by .Afidavits
Showing Conditions in Regard to the
Contract
fTrom Saturday IS Daily

fTrom Saturdays Daily
Judge BeIden in the circuit court this
morning handed down a decision dis
solving the injunction issued by court
commissioner John G. Slater by which
the city council was restrained from
making any further payments on the
city hall. The decision of the court
touches every point Of the argument
of Gaastra and puts a pretty effectual
stop on further interference with the
construction Of the building. In part
the court says:
"This is a taxpayer S action wherein
the plaintiff alleges that certain work
done upon the new City Hall, in the
city of Kenosha, has not been done in
accordance with the contract, in that
certain concrete mixtures do not com
! ply with the specifications. The plain
tiff asks that the defendants be per-
petually enjoined from paying for said
work until the directive work be re-
moved and reconstructed in accordance
| with the contract and specifications
and from approving any further work
1 done by the Contracting Company in
like defective manner; and for other
| relief: and that in the meantime, pend
ding the hearing and determination
FL
of this action, the issuance of any or
ders upon the City Treasurer in favor
of the Construction company and the
issuance of architects certificates be
enjoined.
| Upon the hearing of said order to
show cause, all the allegations of this
complaint set up by the plaintiff as en-
fitting him to the equitable relief
sought are positively denied by the af-
fdavits of those having actual charge
and supervision of the work alleged
to be defective. II
OF course the general rule is that to
entitle- one to equitable relief, he must
clearly satisfy the court of his right
threto, that he is without adequate
remedy at law and that he is subjected
to irreparable injury.
1t is the general, but not universal
rule that where all the equities Of the
complaint upon which temporary in
junction has been granted are speci-
fically and positively denied by veri-
fed answer, Athe injunction will be dis,
solved. Affidavits upon the hearing,
such as that now before the court. NAV
be taken to have the same effect as
verified answer.
1t appears here that the building in
question has progressed to about the
point where it is ready to be rooted in.
and that it is very necessary, in order
to avoid serious damage and irrepar-
able injury to the building, the mater
ial and interior construction, that the
building be put under roof speedily in
order to protect it from the elements
OF the winter season. Including the
estimate and allowance due within tba
next two or three days, as the court
! is advised, should an architects cor.
tificate to that end be granted, the TO-
tai payments to the Construction COM
pany will be only about one-half. or
perhaps, a little more, of the contract
price for the construction Of the build
ing. The Construction Company has
given a bond of $50, 1000 for the ner-
Torrance Of it's contract. All the al
legations of the complaint upon which
the right to equitable relief sought is
based are positively and unequiyocal-
ably denied by the affidavits of those
in a position to know whereof thew
speak. 1t is clear that if the city
authorities should be restrained from
presently issuing orders for amounts
that may be due upon the approval of
work done and issuance of the arcbi-
tect s certificate therefor, and work on
the building should stop, serious dam
age, far outweighing that which might
probably be suffered by compartments
if their cause be established, would
result.
The plaintiff offers in open court to
| proceed to q hearing on the merits at
any time. IF the defendants. after an
swering, meet this proposition, deter
animation upon the merits may be speed
ily had
The court is of the opinion that, in
the meantime, its discretion should be
exercised by denying the application
flor temporary injunction
The application for a temporary in
junction will be denied and the re-
straining order granted by the court
commissioner dissolved,
The usual motion costs in favor of
the defendant will follow.