Dunahoo v. Dunahoo
This text of 182 S.E. 848 (Dunahoo v. Dunahoo) 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
The exception is to a refusal to grant an interlocutory injunction to prevent the sale of property under an execution. Held, that the petitioner had an adequate and complete remedy at law by claim. Teasley v. Bradley, 110 Ga. 497 (35 S. E. 782, 78 Am. St. R. 113); Douglas v. Jenkins, 146 Ga. 341 (91 S. E. 49, Ann. Cas. 1918C, 322); Williams v. Smith, 148 Ga. 615 (97 S. E. 670); Myers v. Warrenfells, 153 Ga. 648, 653 (113 S. E. 180); Eslinger v. Herndon, 158 Ga. 823 (124 S. E. 169, 900); James v. Upton, 160 Ga. 819 (129 S. E. 100); Perry v. Gormley, 177 Ga. 372 (170 S. E. 223). The court did not err in refusing an injunction.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
182 S.E. 848, 181 Ga. 494, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunahoo-v-dunahoo-ga-1935.