The petition, after reciting substantially the facts stated, avers that thе plaintiffs had objected 'to the defendant’s maintaining the switch and nоtified him to remove the same; that upon his refusal so to ■do they had disconnected his line from the line of the Blue Mound company, аnd that he had thereafter reattached the same. Their ground for injunction is embraced substantially in the following paragraph:
“Plaintiffs further aver that they have no adequate remedy at law, and that, they suffer great annoyance and inconvenience by reason of the said defendant’s ■connecting his individual telephone with another telephone company’s line, switch-board and exchаnge, while being connected with the line, switch-board and ■exchangе of the Farmers’ Mutual Telephone Company, ■and that said plaintiffs will suffer irreparable injury if said defendant is permitted to keep his said individual telephone so connected with the two said teleрhone companies as hereinbefore alleged.”
The dеfendant contends that the petition does not 'state facts sufficient to sustain a cause of action. Section 87 of the civil code provides:
“The petition must contain, . . . second, a statеment of the facts constituting the cause of action, in ■ordinary аnd concise language, and without repetition.”
Injunction is an extrаordinary remedy, and is .granted only where it appears that the 'рlaintiff has 'no adequate remedy at law and if the defendant be nоt restrained from committing the wrong the plaintiff Will suffer irreparable injury. Aрplying the requirements of the code to this special requiremеnt, a petition to be sufficient must state facts which show that the plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and if the injunction be denied he will suffer irreparable injury. 'This petition merely pleads the bald cоnclusions, unless it be that* the allegation that they'will suffer great annoyance and inconvenience be an allegation of spe
It is also contended that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the judgment in favor of the-plaintiffs, but we need not discuss this if, as we have concluded, the petition was insufficient and error was committed in denying the motion fоr judgment on the pleadings.
We have not been favored with any brief оn the part, of the defendants in error, and heard only a brief oral argument on their behalf. Such an argument, disconnected with any brief, is, tо a court unfamiliar with the facts and after days spent in hearing other cases, cohsultating thereon, and deciding the same, of little assistance.
The c.ase is remanded, with instructions to set aside the judgment and to proceed in accordance with the-views herein expressed.