Derst Baking Co. v. City of Clanton

Supreme Court of Georgia

Derst Baking Co. v. City of Clanton

170 Ga. 526

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided May 16, 1930·No. No. 7388·Published

Opinion

Hill, J.

The ordinance being attacked upon the ground that it was invalid, and the trial judge in his order and judgment stating that the ordinance is excessive and discriminatory, but basing his judgment denying an injunction on the ground that the plaintiff had an adequate remedy at law, and the ground upon which the court put its decision not being sound in law, it is ordered that the judgment be reversed, and the case be remanded to the court below to pass upon the validity of the ordinance. Judgment reversed.

All the Jusiiees eoneur. B. H. Burroughs, for plaintiff. E. G. Elmore and P. M. Anderson, for defendant.

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

Hill, J.

The ordinance being attacked upon the ground that it was invalid, and the trial judge in his order and judgment stating that the ordinance is excessive and discriminatory, but basing his judgment denying an injunction on the ground that the plaintiff had an adequate remedy at law, and the ground upon which the court put its decision not being sound in law, it is ordered that the judgment be reversed, and the case be remanded to the court below to pass upon the validity of the ordinance. Judgment reversed.

All the Jusiiees eoneur. B. H. Burroughs, for plaintiff. E. G. Elmore and P. M. Anderson, for defendant.

Derst Baking Co. v. City of Clanton, 170 Ga. 526 (Ga. 1930).

Pincite

170 Ga. 526 (Derst Baking Co. v. City of Clanton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.