Conwell v. Neal

41 S.E. 629, 115 Ga. 421, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 434
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedApril 29, 1902
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 41 S.E. 629 (Conwell v. Neal) 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
Conwell v. Neal, 41 S.E. 629, 115 Ga. 421, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 434 (Ga. 1902).

Opinion

Lumpkin, P. J.

An equitable petition to enjoin a pending action at law and bring the plaintiff therein to a settlement of certain cross-demands is not good when insolvency is not alleged, and when no reason appears why the plaintiff in the equitable proceeding can not, in defense to such action, set up those cross-demands against the other party.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Lewis, J., absent.

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

Related

Bainbridge Farm Co. v. Ball
141 S.E. 647 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1928)
Conwell v. Neal
45 S.E. 910 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1903)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 S.E. 629, 115 Ga. 421, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 434, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conwell-v-neal-ga-1902.