Bennett v. Dickey & Martin

125 S.E. 455, 159 Ga. 267, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 428
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedNovember 15, 1924
DocketNo. 4406
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 125 S.E. 455 (Bennett v. Dickey & Martin) 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
Bennett v. Dickey & Martin, 125 S.E. 455, 159 Ga. 267, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 428 (Ga. 1924).

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

The discretion of the trial judge in granting or refusing an injunction at the interlocutory hearing, where the evidence is conflicting, will not be interfered with unless it is made to appear that there was an abuse of discretion. In this ease it does not appear that the .discretion of the trial judge was abused.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. B. A. Moore, for plaintiff. B. B. Chastain, for defendants. .

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

Related

Ballard v. Waites
21 S.E.2d 848 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
McKenzie v. Emanuel Farm Co.
129 S.E. 89 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
125 S.E. 455, 159 Ga. 267, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bennett-v-dickey-martin-ga-1924.