Alford v. Gibson
This text of 131 S.E. 529 (Alford v. Gibson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
Where a verdict and judgment for a stated sum of money is rendered against a party who sues out a bill of exceptions bringing the case here for review, he is not entitled to an injunction to prevent the enforcement of the judgment and the fi. fa. issued thereon until the decision of the ease brought here to review the judgment first referred to, [568]*568where no supersedeas was obtained in the first instance. Civil Code (1910), § 6167; Parker-Hensel Engineering Co. v. Schuler, 133 Ga. 696 (66 S. E. 800); Ivey v. Payne, 136 Ga. 519 (2) (71 S. E. 886); Cumberland Fertilizer Co. v. Williams, 146 Ga. 27 (90 S. E. 464). The judge therefore erred in granting an interlocutory injunction.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
131 S.E. 529, 161 Ga. 567, 1926 Ga. LEXIS 302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alford-v-gibson-ga-1926.