Case Name: PORTO RICO RAILWAY, LIGHT, & POWER COMPANY, Plff., v. JOSÉ E. BENEDICTO ET AL., Composing the Public Service Commission of Porto Rico, and SALVADOR MESTRE as Attorney General of Porto Rico, Dfts.
Court: United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1920-08-31
Citations: 12 P.R. Fed. 105
Docket Number: No. 1066
Parties: PORTO RICO RAILWAY, LIGHT, & POWER COMPANY, Plff., v. JOSÉ E. BENEDICTO ET AL., Composing the Public Service Commission of Porto Rico, and SALVADOR MESTRE as Attorney General of Porto Rico, Dfts.
Judges: 
Reporter: Porto Rico Federal Reports
Volume: 12
Pages: 105–106

Head Matter:
PORTO RICO RAILWAY, LIGHT, & POWER COMPANY, Plff., v. JOSÉ E. BENEDICTO ET AL., Composing the Public Service Commission of Porto Rico, and SALVADOR MESTRE as Attorney General of Porto Rico, Dfts.
San Juan,
Equity,
No. 1066.
Opinion filed August 31, 1920.

Opinion:
Technical defenses and defenses on the merits can better be presented on fuller pleadings than answer to rule to show cause. The inquiry on application for injunction pendente lite is as to the probability of a right in the plaintiff, probability of its violation by the defendant on the pleadings and affidavits and the balance of convenience. It seems to the court, therefore, that an injunction pendente lite should issue upon the plaintiffs making bond in whatever sum will cover the probable costs and damage to its customers in case of judgment adverse to plaintiff, recoverable on petitions in this case, reserving all other questions for the hearing. Indianapolis Gas Co. v. Indianapolis, 82 Fed. 245; West India & P. Teleg. Co. v. Benedicto, 10 Porto Rico Fed. Rep. 444, as affirmed.
It is so ordered.