Anderson v. Hall

Supreme Court of Georgia

Anderson v. Hall

58 S.E. 43, 128 Ga. 525, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 157

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 14, 1907

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 58 S.E. 43 (Anderson v. Hall) 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.

Bluebook

Anderson v. Hall, 58 S.E. 43, 128 Ga. 525, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 157 (Ga. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Beck, J.

1. Where the defendant in an injunction proceeding is informed, by the attorney for the plaintiff that a temporary restraining order has been issued against him, and is also shown a copy of the order, which information clearly and plainly indicates what is the act from which he must abstain, he is bound to obey the order of the court, whether he is served with the writ or not; and a refusal or failure to comply with the order, under such circumstances, is as much a contempt as if the defendant had been personally served by the sheriff with the writ. Murphey v. Harker, 115 Ga. 77.

2. The evidence ivas sufficient to authorize the court below to find and hold, that the defendant had been notified of the contents of the restraining order, by the attorney for the plaintiff, and actually read a copy thereof which was exhibited to him by said attorney, and that, after being thus notified, the defendant violated the terms of the order; and. the judgment holding- the defendant in contempt for said violation, should be allowed to stand.

Judgment affirmed.

Alt the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Beck, J.

1. Where the defendant in an injunction proceeding is informed, by the attorney for the plaintiff that a temporary restraining order has been issued against him, and is also shown a copy of the order, which information clearly and plainly indicates what is the act from which he must abstain, he is bound to obey the order of the court, whether he is served with the writ or not; and a refusal or failure to comply with the order, under such circumstances, is as much a contempt as if the defendant had been personally served by the sheriff with the writ. Murphey v. Harker, 115 Ga. 77.

2. The evidence ivas sufficient to authorize the court below to find and hold, that the defendant had been notified of the contents of the restraining order, by the attorney for the plaintiff, and actually read a copy thereof which was exhibited to him by said attorney, and that, after being thus notified, the defendant violated the terms of the order; and. the judgment holding- the defendant in contempt for said violation, should be allowed to stand.

Judgment affirmed.

Alt the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 S.E. 43, 128 Ga. 525, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-hall-ga-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack