Court Opinion

ID: 9531241
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:09:06.798777+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:22.868514
License: Public Domain

*527CONCURRING OPINION
Emmert, C. J.
I concur in the result of the majority opinion. It seems to me it is not necessary to decide more than that the appellee failed to prove damage now or in the future to any property right it might have. There was no proof that appellant was injuring or would injure the appellee by depriving it of any of its motor freight business. The general rule is, injunctions are only issued to protect civil property rights. State ex rel. Zeller v. Montgomery Circuit Court (1945), 223 Ind. 476, 62 N. E. 2d 149.
The record here discloses this to be another case where a temporary injunction was issued without any finding whatever to support it. In my opinion this was error for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in State ex rel. Pub. Serv. Comm. v. Marion C. Ct. (1952), 230 Ind. 277, 302, 103 N. E. 2d 214.
Note.—Reported in 108 N. E. 2d 884.