Chappell v. Akin

39 Ga. 177
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJune 15, 1869
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 39 Ga. 177 (Chappell v. Akin) 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
Chappell v. Akin, 39 Ga. 177 (Ga. 1869).

Opinion

Warner. J.

The error assigned to the judgment of the Court below, in this case, is the dismissal of the complainant’s bill. A Court of Equity, in this State, may, by writ of injunction, restrain the action of a private individual which is illegal or contrary to equity and goods conscience, and for which no adequate remedy is provided at law: Revised Code, sec. 3149. The defendant was the debtor of complainant against whom a verdict had been recovered for $1,000. The defendant had entered an appeal from that verdict, giving his'testatrix, who was then living, as his security for the eventual condemnation money. After her death, he became her executor, and, from the allegations made in the complainant’s bill, equity and good conscience require that he should be restrained from squandering, and disposing of the property of his testatrix, so as not to defeat the collection of the complainant’s debt [180]*180when his remedy at law, under the peculiar facts of the case, would not be adequate for his complete protection. In our judgment, it was error in the Court below in dismissing the complainant’s bill.

Let the judgment of the Court below be reversed.

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

Related

Fuller v. Dillon
136 S.E.2d 733 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1964)
Morris v. Moseley
128 S.E. 753 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
39 Ga. 177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chappell-v-akin-ga-1869.