Court Opinion

ID: 9693385
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 16:39:04.35626+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:45.739438
License: Public Domain

ON REHEARING
COLEMAN, Justice.
In brief filed in support of application for rehearing, respondents ask that we modify the temporary injunction or clarify the opinion so that respondents may now proceed to perform their duty under the • statutes regulating the practice of pharma- . cy.
Respondents appear'to entertain the view thatj because we affirm the orders denying • dissolution', or discharge of the temporary injunction, the circuit court is without power to modify or vacate the temporary injunction so as to take into account Act No. 205, approved August 26, 1966; Special Session 1966, page 231.
The appeal was from two orders denying motions to dissolve and discharge the temporary injunction. The prayer of the bill is for “a writ of injunction, temporary and permanent.” This court did not have before it the matter of the permanent injunction.
Under the usual order of procedure, the case is now ready for decision'by the trial court on the prayer for permanent injunction. We áre not advised of any reason why the trial court cannot proceed to a full hearing, determine the respective rights of the parties,; and do complete equity to all of them .under the statutes which now control their rights.' ,
Opinion extended
Application overruled.
' LIVINGSTON, C. J., and LAWSON •and KOHN, JJ., concur.