Lord Wellesley v. Earl of Mornington
Court of Chancery
50 Eng. Rep. 786 (1848)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
Lord Wellesley (plaintiff) obtained an injunction against the Earl of Mornington (defendant) to prevent the earl from cutting trees. The injunction did not mention agents or employees; it applied only to the earl. Batley (defendant), an agent of the earl, continued cutting trees. Wellesley moved to have Batley imprisoned for breaching the injunction, but the motion failed. Wellesley then brought a motion against Batley for contempt, though Wellesley’s attorney declined to press for Batley’s imprisonment in support of the motion.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.