INJUNCTION. A prohibitory writ, issued by the authority and generally under the seal of a court of equity, to restrain one or more of the defendants or parties or quasi par ties to a suit or proceeding in equity, from doing, or from permitting his servants or oth ers who are under his control to do, an act which is deemed to be inequitable so far as regards the rights of some other party or parties to such suit or proceedings in equity. Eden, Inj. c. 1; Kerr, Inj. 9 ; Jeremy, Eq. Jur. b. 3, c. 2, § 1; Story, Eq. Jur. § 861; Will. Eq. Jur. 341; 2 Green, Ch. 136 ; 1 Madd. 126.
The writ of injunction may be regarded as the correlation of the writ of mandamus, the one enjoining the performance of an un lawful act, the other requiring the perform ance of a lawful or neglected act ; Beach, Inj. § 9.
Under the present practice in England, in junction is not by writ, but the order of the court has the same effect.
The interdict of the Roman law resembles, in many respects, our injunction. It was used in three distinct but cognate senses. 1. It was applied to signify the edicts made by the prEetor, declaratory of his intention to give a remedy in certain cases, chiefly to preserve or to restore possession ; this inter dict was called edictal: edictale, quod pro torit edictis proponitur, ut sciant omnes ea forma posse implorari. 2. It was used to signify his order or decree, applying the rem edy in the given case before him, and was then called decretal: decretale, quod prcetor re nata implorantibus decrevit. It is this which bears a strong resemblance to the in junction of a court of equity. 3. It was used, in the last place, to signify the very remedy sought in the suit commenced under the pr a. tor's edict ; and thus it became the denom ination of the action itself. Livingston on the Batture case ; 2 Story, Eq. Jur. § 865.
Mandatory injunctions command the de fendant to do a particular thing. Preventive, commands him to refrain from an act.. The former are resorted to rarely and are seldom allowed before a final hearing ; Corning v. Nail Factory, 40 N. Y. 191; Audeuried v. R. Co., 68 Pa. 370, 8 Am. Rep. 195 ; 10 Ves. 192 : 20 Am. Dec. 389, note; Bailey v. Schnitzius, 45 N. J. Eq. 178, 13 Atl. 247, 16 Atl. 680. They are not granted except to prevent a failure of justice and 'then only when the right is clearly established ; Buettgenbach v.
Gerbig, 2 Neb. (unof.) 889, 90 N. W. 654; Budd v. Camden Horse R. Co., 63 N. J. Eq. 804, 52 Atl. 1130, affirming 61 N. J. Eq. 543, 48 Atl. 1028 ; nor where there is unreasonable de lay in the application ; MacKintyre v. Jones, 9 Pa. Super. Ct. 543.
Preliminary or interlocutory injunctions are used to restrain the party enjoined from doing or continuing to do the wrong com plained of, either temporarily or during the continuance of the suit or proceeding in equi ty in which such injunction is granted, and before the rights of the parties have been settled by the decree of the court in such suit or proceeding. The sole object of a pre liminary injunction is to preserve the status quo until the merits can be heard. The sta tus quo is the last actual peaceable uncon tested status which preceded the pending controversy, and a wrongdoer cannot shelter himself behind a sudden or recently changed status, though made before the chancellor's hand actually reached him ; Fredericks v. Huber, 180 Pa. 572, 37 Atl. 90. See RE STRAINING ORDER.
Final or perpetual injunctions are award ed, or directed to be issued, or the prelim inary injunction already issued is made final or perpetual, by the final decree of the court, or when the rights of the parties so far as relates to the subject of the injunction are finally adjudicated and disposed of by the or der or decree of the court; 2 Freem. Ch. 106; Caruthers v. Hartsfield, 3 Yerg. (Tenn.) 366, 24 Am. Dec. 580; Kruson v. Kruson, 1 Bibb (Ky.) 184; Kerr, Inj. *12.
In England, injunctions were divided into common injunctions and special injunctions; Eden, Inj. 178, n.; Will. Eq. Jur. 342. The common injunction was obtained of course when the defendant in the suit in equity was in default for not entering his appearance, or for not putting in his answer to the com plainant's bill within the times prescribed by the practice of the court; Story, Eq. Jur. § 892 ; 18 Ves. 523 ; Jeremy, Eq. Jur. Spe cial injunctions were founded upon the oath of the complainant, or other evidence of the truth of the charges contained in his bill of complaint. They were obtained upon a spe cial application, and usually upon notice of such application given to the party whose proceedings were sought to be enjoined; Story, Eq. Jur. § 892; Jeremy, Eq. Jur. 339; 18 Ves. 522.