
    John Quincy Osborne v. Andrew H. Clayton and another.
    No appeal will lie from an order discharging a rule to show cause why an injunction should not be dissolved, on the ground that the petition sets forth no legal cause for issuing it. The order is an interlocutory one, and works no irreparable injury. If erroneous, it may be corrected by appeal from the final judgment.
    Appeal from the Parish Court of New Orleans, Maurian, J. The plaintiff having enjoined the execution of a judgment obtained against him by the defendants, a rule was taken on the former to show cause why the injunction should not be dissolved, with damages, on the ground that the petition discloses no legal ground for issuing it. The defendants are appellants from an order discharging the rule.
    The case was submitted, without argument, by Benjamin, for the plaintiff, and Durant, for the appellants.
   Morphy, J.

The defendants are appellants from a decree overruling a motion to dissolve an injunction, sued out by the plaintiff to stay the execution of a judgment they had obtained against him in the inferior court. This appeal is clearly premature, as the order made on the trial of the motion is an interlocutory, not a final, decree. It works no irreparable injury to the appellants. The error, if any has been committed, can be corrected by appeal from the final judgment in the case. Code Pract., art. 566.

Appeal dismissed.  