The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Chappell (P) filed a bill in equity claiming that D had employed detectives to follow P and watch him wherever he went and that this conduct caused him great inconvenience and annoyance, interfered with his social intercourse and business and caused grave suspicions to be entertained about him so as to greatly damage his financial credit. P alleged that D intended to continue the same course of conduct. P prayed for an injunction to restrain and prohibit D from continuing this conduct, for damages and for general relief. P also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. D claimed that the bill did not entitle P to any relief in equity because it did not set forth any danger or irreparable damage. D then amended his demurrer and filed an answer. The court refused to grant the preliminary injunction. Eventually, the court sustained the demurrer, even though it had been withdrawn by amendment and dismissed the bill with costs. This appeal resulted.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.