Arizona Edison Co. v. Southern Sierras Power Co.

(after stating the facts as above). The scope of the inquiry on the appeal is not confined to the question of the exercise of the trial court’s discretion, which is usually decisive on appeals from orders granting or refusing to dissolve interlocutory injunctions. In a ease such as we find this to be, an appellate court may properly go farther and consider whether or not the case made by the bill of complaint is of the class of cases in which injunctive relief may be granted; 'for it is well-settled that, where there is an insuperable objection to the bill, either as to jurisdiction or merits, an appellate court may enter a final decree directing its dismissal. Mast, Foos & Co. v. Stover Mfg. Co., 177 U. S. 485, 495 , 20 S. Ct. 708 , 44 L. Ed. 856 ; Harriman v. Northern Securities Co., 197 U. S. 244, 287 , 25 S. Ct. 493 , 49 L. Ed. 739 ; U. S. Fidelity Co. v. Bray, 225 U. S. 205, 214 , 32 S. Ct. 620 , 56 L. Ed. 1055 ; Denver v. New York Trust Co., 229 U. S. 123, 136 , 33 S. Ct. 657 , 57 L. Ed. 1101 .

To enjoin the breach of a contract is, in effect, to decree its specific performance, and the principles applicable to the two remedies are the same. 2 Pom. Equity Jur. (3d Ed.) §…