Clanton v. Battle

83 S.E. 207, 142 Ga. 607, 1914 Ga. LEXIS 473
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided October 14, 1914·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

Evans, P. J.

There was no abuse of discretion in refusing an interlocutory injunction. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Clanton v. Battle, 83 S.E. 207, 142 Ga. 607, 1914 Ga. LEXIS 473 (Ga. 1914).

83 S.E. 207 (Clanton v. Battle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Taylor v. Taylor
120 S.E.2d 874 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1961)
Breed v. National Credit Association
88 S.E.2d 15 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1955)
Jones v. Logan Co.
68 S.E.2d 718 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Peters v. Adcock
26 S.E.2d 342 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1943)
Douglas v. Austin-Western Road Machinery Co.
177 S.E. 912 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)
Abercrombie v. Georgia Distributing Co.
158 S.E. 530 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1931)
Layton v. State
140 S.E. 847 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1927)
Fenner v. Boykin
3 F.2d 674 (N.D. Georgia, 1925)
Hall v. Wingate
126 S.E. 796 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1924)
Allen v. Sams
120 S.E. 808 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Cartersville Grocery Co. v. Taylor
120 S.E. 447 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Anderson v. Cavanaugh
85 S.E. 606 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1915)