In the federal courts and in the equity courts of most of the states the English practice of granting the common injunction has been discontinued or superseded, either by statute or by rules of the courts; the pre liminary injunctions are, therefore, all spe cial injunctions in the courts of this country where such English practice has been super seded.
When used. The injunction is used in a great variety of cases, of which cases the following are some of the most common: to stay proceedings at law by the party en joined; Albritton v. Bird, R. M. Charlt. (Ga.) 93; Lyles v. Halton; 6 Gill & J. (Md.) 122; Bell v. Cunningham, 1 Sumn. 89, Fed. Cas. No. 1,246 ; Gridley v. Wynant, 23 How. (U. S.) 500, 16 L. Ed. 411; Monson v. Law rence, 27 Conn. 579; Frith v. Roe, 23 Ga. 139; to restrain the transfer of stocks, of promissory notes, bills of exchange, and oth er evidences of debt ; Story, Eq. Jur. §§ 906, 955; 2 Vern. 122 ; Osborn v. Bank, 9 Wheat. (U. S.) 738, 6 L. Ed. 204; Jones v. Ed wards, 57 N. C. 257; Burns v. Weesner, 134 Ind. 442, 34 N. E. 10; to restrain the trans fer of the title to property ; Morris Canal & Banking Co. v. Mayor, etc., 12 N. J. Eq. 252; Gayle v. Fattle, 14 Md. 69; Stringham v. Brown, 7 Ia. 33 ; Conant v. Warren, 6 Gray (Mass.) 562; Lee v. Simpson, 37 Fed. 12, 2 L. R. A. 659 ; or the parting with the pos session of such property; 3 V. & B. 168; Oneieda Mfg. Society v. Lawrence, 4 Cow. (N. Y.) 440; to restrain the party enjoined from setting up an unequitable defence in a suit at law ; Mitt. Eq. Pl. 134; to restrain the collection of illegal taxes; St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Apperson, 97 Mo. 300; 10 S. W. 478 ; Norman, etc., v. Boaz, 85 Ky. 557, 4 S. W. 316 ; Clee v. Sanders, 74 Mich. 692, 42 N. W. 154; or taxes imposed in contraven tion of the United States constitution ; In re Tyler, 149 U. S. 164, 13 Sup. Ct. 785, 37 L. Ed. 689; to restrain the infringement of a patent ; Atwill v. Ferrett, 2 Blatchf. 39, Fed. Cas. No. 640; Sullivan v. Redfield, 1 Paine 441, Fed. Cas. No. 13,597 ; Schneider v. Glass Co., 36 Fed. 582; or a copyright, or the pirating of trade-marks ; 17 Ves. 424 ; Schneider v. Williams, 44 N. J. Eq. 391, 14 Atl. 812; Small v. Sanders, 118 Ind. 105, 20 N. E. 296 ; Brown Chemical Co. v. Stearns & Co., 37 Fed. 360; to restrain a party from passing off his goods as those of another by means of simulating his labels, packages, etc.; Lawrence Mfg. Co. v. Mfg. Co., 138 U. S. 537, 11 Sup. Ct. 396, 34 L. Ed. 997; to prevent the removal of property ; Trustees of Davidson College v. Chambers' Ex'rs, 56 N. C. 253; or the evidences of title to property, or the evi dences of indebtedness, out of the jurisdic tion of the court ; to restrain the committing of waste; 4 Kent 161; Brady v. Waldron, 2 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 148; Parsons v. Hughes, 12 Md. 1. Cowles v. Shaw, 2 Ia. 496 ; Thom as v. James, 32 Ala. 723; to prevent the creation or the continuance of a private nui sance; Hill v. Sayles; 12 Cush. (Mass.) 454; Cunningham v. Rice, 28 Ga. 30; Weimer v. Lowery, 11 Cal. 101; Snyder v. Cabell, 29 W. Va. 48, 1 S. E. 241; Ulbricht v. Water Co., 86 Ala. 587, 6 South. 78, 4 L. R. A. 572, 11 Am. St. Rep. 72 ; Northern Pac. R. Co. v. Whalen, 149 U. S. 157, 13 Sup. Ct. 822, 37 L. Ed. 686; or of a public nuisance particu larly noxious to the party asking for the in junction ;- Mitt Eq. Pl. 124; City of New York v. Mapes, 6 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 46; Packet Co. v. Sorrels, 50 Ark. 466, 8 S. W. 683; De Vaughn v. Minor, 77 Ga. 809, 1 S. E. 433; to restrain illegal acts of municipal officers ; Pope v. Inhabitants of Halifax, 12 Cush. (Mass.) 410; Baldwin v. City of Buf falo, 29 Barb. (N. Y.) 396; Lumsden v. City of Milwaukee, 8 Wis. 485; Briggs v. Borden, 71 Mich. 87, 38 N. W. 712; Pennoyer v. Mc Connaughy, 140 U. S. 1, 11 Sup. Ct. 699, 35 L. Ed. 363; to prevent a purpresture ; Langs dale v. Bonton, 12 Ind. 467 ; to restrain the breach of a covenant or agreement; 1 D. M. & G. 619 ; Singer Sewing-Mach. Co. v. Em broidery Co., 1 Holmes 258, Fed. Cas. No. 12,904, see infra; to restrain the publication of a libel; [1891] 2 Ch. 269; Grand Rapids
School Furniture Co. v. Furniture Co., 92 Mich. 558, 52 N. W. 1009, 16 L. R. A. 721, 31 Am. St. Rep. 611; [1892] 1 Ch. 571; but see [1891] 2 Ch. 294; to restrain the alienation of property pending a suit for specific per formance ; 3 D. J. & S. 63; to restrain the disclosure of confidential communications, papers, and secrets ; Kerr, Inj. § 436 ; Bisph. Eq. 427 ; Little v. Gallus, 4 App. Div. 569, 38 N. Y. Supp. 487; 9 Hare 255; to restrain the publication of unpublished manuscripts, letters, etc. ; 4 H. L. C. 867 ; 2 Mer. 437 ; to restrain members of a firm from doing acts inconsistent with the partnership articles, etc.; 12 Beay. 414; to restrain waste, even though the title be in litigation ; Erhardt v. Boaro, 113 U. S. 537, 5 Sup. Ct. 565, 28 L. Ed. 1116 ; to restrain the cutting of timber on land the title to which is in dispute ; Wood v. Braxton, 54 Fed. 1005; to restrain the construction of a permanent tunnel through a lot ; Richards v. Dower, 64 Cal. 62, 28 Pac. 113; or a continuous trespass, where a party claims a right of way over the land, the use of which if permitted will ripen into an easement ; Murphy v. Lincoln, 63 Vt. 278, 22 Atl. 418 ; Learned v. Castle, 78 Cal. 454, 18 Pac. 872, 21 Pac. 11; see Warren Mills v. Seed Co., 65 Miss. 391, 4 South. 298, 7 Am. St. Rep. 671; Heilbron v. Canal Co., 75 Cal. 426, 17 Pac. 535, 7 Am. St. Rep. 183 ; Ellis v. Wren, 84 Ky. 254, 1 S. W. 440; to re strain trespass, leaving the question of title to be settled by a suit at law ; Cheesman v. Shreve, 37 Fed. 36; to restrain a railway from entering and taking possession of land without first having acquired the right to do so; Lake Erie & W. R. Co. v. Michener, 117 Ind. 465, 20 N. E. 254; Kansas City, St. J. & C. B. R. Co. v. R. Co., 97 Mo. 457, 10 S. W. 826, 3 L. R. A. 240; to restrain intimidation of workmen by labor unions; Coeur D'Alene Consolidated & Mining Co. v. Miner's Union, 51 Fed. 260, 19 L. R. A. 382 (see LABOR) ; to restrain a boycott ; Casey v. Typographical Union, 45 Fed. 135, 12 L. R. A. 193 ; to re strain Sunday base ball games ; McMillan v. Kuehnle, 76 N. J. Eq. 256, 73 Atl. 1054 (which was put on the ground of nuisance, as the court had no jurisdiction to enforce, by injunction, the Sunday laws) ; to restrain a defaulting or insolvent executor or admin istrator from getting in assets; Kerr, Inj. § 451; 1 WilL Exec. 275 ; to restrain a trus tee from the misuse of his powers ; 1 Hare 146; to protect certain liens, as that of an equitable mortgagee, or of a solicitor upon his client's papers ; 7 D. M. & G. 288 ; to restrain companies from doing illegal acts, either as against the public or third parties, or the members thereof ; 13 Beay. 45 ; to restrain the unlawful diversion of water; Heilbron v. Canal Co., 75 Cal. 426, 17 Pac. 535, 7 Am. St. Rep. 183 ; Dayton v. Drainage Com'rs, 128 Ill. 271, 21 N. E. 198; or the pol lution of a stream ; Barrett v. Cemetery Ass'n, 159 Ill. 385, 42 N. E. 891, 31 L. R. A. 109, 50 Am. St. Rep. 168; or the flowage of land by -a water company, unless the award is paid ; Wilmington Water-Power Co. v. Evans, 166 Ill. 548, 46 N. E. 1083 ; to restrain the erection of a house across a public alley ; Cohen v. Bank, 81 Ga. 723, 7 S. E. 811. It lies to prevent a threatened breach of trust in the diversion of corporate funds by illegal payment out of its capital or profits ; Pollock v. Trust Co., 157 U. S. 429, 15 Sup. Ct. 6'73, 39 L. Ed. 759; at the suit of a private person to prevent the publication of of picture (but not where the person is of public reputa tion) ; Corliss v. E. W. Walker Co., 64 Fed. 280, 31 L. R. A. 283; but not to restrain the publication of a biography of the complain ant or of a member of his family Corliss v. E. W. Walker Co., 57 Fed. 434 ; but it will lie to enjoin the publication of a picture of a deceased member of complainant's family, where the respondent had not observed the conditions under which he obtained it ; Cor liss v. E. W. Walker Co., 57 Fed. 434. See