(United States Supreme Court) A wrongful injunction had restrained a State Railroad Commission from enforcing its shipping tariffs. Two frequent shippers were also enjoined as representative defendants. The injunction was directed against ‘the Commissioners . . the individual shippers named as defendants, and all other patrons of the road in the shipment of freight.’ It was dissolved on appeal. So the injunction had compelled the ‘patrons of the road’ to overpay.
Held: The question was whether there could be a restitutionary claim on their behalf as a class. There could be because they were the class that were injuncted.
Citations:
(1918) 249 US 134
Jurisdiction:
United States
Cited by:
Cited – Smithkline Beecham Plc Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others (No 2) CA 23-May-2006
The parties to the action had given cross undertakings to support the grant of an interim injunction. A third party subsequently applied to be joined, and now sought to take advantage of the cross undertakings to claim the losses incurred through . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.242624
