Show GRIFFIN KNOCKED OUT Judge Miles Dissolves the Injunction In-junction Against the City PLAINTIFFS REMEDY LIES IN AW ACTION AT LAW Court of Equity Cannot Interpose an Injunction in the Sprinkling Matter Mat-ter City Can Now Hake the Contract Con-tract With Heath to Do the Extra Sprinkling Work Plaintiff Notes An Exception to the Ruling J H Griffin the street sprinkling contractor tractor failed to secure the Injunction ought restraining the city council from entering Into a contract with Heath to do extra sprinkling Judge HUes deciding last night that this cource was not proper ando and-o obtain relief he should bring his action ion In a court of justice on an action to recover damages for a violation of con tract Richards Richards and C F Louf > ourow appeared for Griffin and Judge Iclvay for the city Counsel for the defense demurred to the complaint on the grounds that the court had no jurisdiction and there was a de feet of parties defendant and that the mayor and city council should have been made the defendants In the case instead of the city The status of the demurrer was quickly disposed of so far as the latter portion of the same is concerned by the court holding hold-ing with the attorneys for slalntlff that the cur did business through the mayor and council only and hence the complaint was all right in that respect The question ques-tion then came up on the matter of the jurisdiction of the court In arguing the matter Judge McKav took the position that a court of equity had no right to Interfere with an Injunction Injunc-tion In the affairs of a municipality and that the proper course to pursue was the bringing of an action for damages In court Judge McKay submitted arguments and presented authorities at some length In support of this position Replying for the plaintiff Mr Richards admitted all that had been said concerning concern-ing the bringing of a suit for damages but In this Instance It would be impossible for plaintiff to compute the measure of damages which would be just and equitable equit-able The city might order a certain amount of work and It might not how then could plaintiff state in a complaint what the men ure of damage would be The Court You could make your estimate es-timate at the end of the sprinkling Season Sea-son and then bring your suit Mr Richards But this contract runs for three years and your honor willl see at once that we cannot bring three suits for damages on one contract Continuing the attorney said the measure meas-ure of damages would Include the cost of the horses and wagons necessary to do the work the cost of the work or the profits less the cost and matters which could not properly be passed upon by anyone any-one or roveT by anyone prior to the bringing of a suit Then how can a measure meas-ure of damage be estimated The Court You can prove that at suit at law as well as an action In equity Yes but we think the only way we can get relief Is by an injunction We are prenared to prove by evidence that defendant de-fendant in this action Is about to violate Its contract Judge Loofbourow followed in an argument argu-ment based on a similar hypothesis and at the conclusion the court denied the application ap-plication for an injunction saying ho 1 thought at the time the order was issued for a temporary restraining order them was grave doubts as to whether it should issue or not The claim Is made that defendant de-fendant is about to violate a contract If that Is done plaintiff has a remedy at law This question had been decided by the court before In several Instances and tho decision had been when no adequate remedy rem-edy existed then an Injunction should apply ap-ply In tills case he was not satisfied that a remedy dd not exist at law and the temporary Injunction was dissolved Mr Richards took an exception to the ruling of the court but whether he will carry the matter any further remains to be determined |