The citizen. (Honesdale, Pa.) 1908-1914, 1912-11-22
SUPREME COURT
REVISES RULES
Makes Sweeping Changes In
Procedure In Equity Cases,
SIMPLIFICATI0N THE AIM.

Reduction Of the Cost Of Litigation and
the elimination Of Delays Sought by
Chief Justice White and His Asso
ciates-New Anti-injunetion Rule.
Sweeping changes in procedure in
equity cases in federal courts through
out the United States are effected in
revised rules promulgated by the su-
preme courts of the United States. The
object is to reduce the cost of litiga
tion and to eliminate delays.
The rules were announced 10y Chief
Justice White. who, however, omitted
explanation of one which would pro-
hibit issue of preliminary injunctions
without notice to the opposite party
and also restricting issues of tempo
rary restraining orders.
The new anti-injunction rule iuror
porateS into practice several demands
of labor leaders which they sought TO
have recognized by the enactment of
the so called Clayton injunction
bill. The new rule follows in gen
eral way the rules OF the federal court
in the ninth circuit, which comprises
the Pacific coast states.
Samuel Gompers, president of the
American Federation of Labor. had
this to say about the anti-injunction
rule:
at is step in the right direction
and one of the things labor has long
been fighting for"
To Do Away With Delay.
Chief Justice White grouped the re-
forms under four or five heads. one
was in regard to the exercise OF power
by the federal courts in equitable mat
ters. Another was described as being
designed primarily to remove all un-
necessary steps in modes of pleading
and to bring the parties quickly to the
issue. A third was described as being
a restriction in the modes of taking
testimony. particularly in patent and
copyright cases.
The whole intention has been" said
the chief justice, "to bring the taking
of testimony down to a more simplitied
and inexpensive method"
Another reform was said by the
chief justice TO be illustrated by the
statement that the new rules in gen
eral provide for trial by the court in
stead Of a reference of the suit to
referee to take the testimony and re-
port back to the court.
The chief justice said the new rules,
which go into effect Feb. l, 1913, would
make it possible for the appellate court
not to reverse suits merely because OF
errors not prejudicial.
The New Injunction Rule.
The new rule on injunCtions provides:
No preliminary injunction shall be
granted without notice to the opposite
party, nor shall any temporary restrain
ing order be granted without notice to
the opposite party unless 1t shall clearly
appear from specific facts shown by affl-
davit or by the verified bill that immedi-
ate and irreparable loss or damage will
result to the applicant before the matter
can be heard on notice.
In case a temporary restraining order
shall be granted without notice in the
contingency specified the matter shall be
made returnable at the earliest possible
time and in no event later than ten days
from the date of the order and shall take
precedence of all matters except older
matters Of the same character. When the
matter comes up for hearing the party
who obtained the temporary restraining
order shall proceed with his application
for a preliminary injunction, and II he
does not do so the court shall dissolve his
temporary restraining order.
Upon two days notice to the party OBJ
tanning such temporary restraining order
the opposite party may appear and move
the dissolution and modification Of the or
der, and in that event the court or judge
shall proceed 10 hear and determine the
motion as eNpeditiously as the ends OF
justice may require Every temporary re-
straining order shall be forthwith filed in
the clerks office
Work of Chief Justice White.
One of the tasks undertaken by Chief
Justice White when he was appointed
TO succeed Melville w. Fuller was to
reform procedure In the courts. He
first revised the rules of the supreme
court itself. For seventeen months the
chief justice and Justices LurtOn and
Van Devanter have been working on
the equity rules as a subcommittee of
the court They asked every federal
judge throughout the country to get
expressions from bar associations on
the subject and wrote to many Others
asking for suggestions.
These suggestions were digested by
the subcommittee, assisted by w. J
Hughes of the department OF justice
The present rules came down from tn.
courts Of England, with only one OF
two revisions.