Court Opinion

ID: 9775671
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 19:06:42.374666+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:30.104500
License: Public Domain

CALVERT, Chief Justice
(concurring).
I concur in the judgment rendered.
The requirement in Rule 683 that the reasons for issuing an injunction be stated in the order could hardly be couched in stronger language. It is mandatory. The order in the instant case states no reasons for its issuance. I concur in the judgment here rendered only because I am willing to recognize an exception to the Rule’s requirement in cases involving injunctive orders granted on behalf of the State to restrain the operation of statutorily declared public nuisances. That, in my judgment, is the effect of the majority’s opinion.