Bowman v. Thomas
This text of 121 S.E. 682 (Bowman v. Thomas) 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.
Opinion
On interlocutory hearing the judge of the court below passed the following order: • “Under the law, the presiding judge is invested with a very wide discretion in granting or refusing injunctions; and under the facts of this case as developed before me, the restraining order heretofore granted, and which appears on the petition, is dissolved and the control of the property described in the petition and the conduct and control of said lodge is remitted to said defendants.” To the foregoing judgment, “and holding-that the defendants were entitled to the custody and control of the local Madison lodge,” the plaintiffs excepted. Under conflicting evidence the court did not err in dissolving the temporary restraining order.
(a) The language employed in the order: “the control of the property described in the petition and the conduct and control of said lodge is remitted to said defendants,” is not construed to mean an adjudication of the final rights of the parties, but only to leave the parties and property in statu quo. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
121 S.E. 682, 157 Ga. 481, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowman-v-thomas-ga-1924.