Dunahoo v. Dunahoo

182 S.E. 848, 181 Ga. 494, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 139
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided December 10, 1935·No. No. 11111·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Gilbert, Justice.

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.

All the Justices conrywr.

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

Dunahoo v. Dunahoo, 182 S.E. 848, 181 Ga. 494, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 139 (Ga. 1935).

182 S.E. 848 (Dunahoo v. Dunahoo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Scarbrough v. Cook
69 S.E.2d 201 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1952)
Ware v. Martin
63 S.E.2d 335 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1951)