Elmore v. Southern Bank & Trust Co.

Supreme Court of Georgia

Elmore v. Southern Bank & Trust Co.

105 S.E. 474, 150 Ga. 811, 1921 Ga. LEXIS 398

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 11, 1921

DocketNo. 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 105 S.E. 474 (Elmore v. Southern Bank & Trust Co.) 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

Elmore v. Southern Bank & Trust Co., 105 S.E. 474, 150 Ga. 811, 1921 Ga. LEXIS 398 (Ga. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

This is a money rule against a sheriff, involving the claims of the holders of conflicting liens. Ho facts were involved which would entitle either party to equitable relief; and there being no prayer for such relief, the case is not within the principle of Berrie v. Smith, 97 Ga. 782 (25 S. E. 757). The remedy is purely statutory, and the case is not of that class of which the Supreme Court has jurisdiction, but is of the class of which the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction. While this court has likened a money rule to mandamus, of which it has jurisdiction as an extraordinary legal remedy, a money rule is not technically mandamus, nor does it involve an extraordinary remedy. The case is therefore transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur. B. J. Bacon and. Grug&r Westbrook, for plaintiff in error. E. K. Wilcox and Pottle & PLof may er, contra.

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

Gilbert, J.

This is a money rule against a sheriff, involving the claims of the holders of conflicting liens. Ho facts were involved which would entitle either party to equitable relief; and there being no prayer for such relief, the case is not within the principle of Berrie v. Smith, 97 Ga. 782 (25 S. E. 757). The remedy is purely statutory, and the case is not of that class of which the Supreme Court has jurisdiction, but is of the class of which the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction. While this court has likened a money rule to mandamus, of which it has jurisdiction as an extraordinary legal remedy, a money rule is not technically mandamus, nor does it involve an extraordinary remedy. The case is therefore transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur. B. J. Bacon and. Grug&r Westbrook, for plaintiff in error. E. K. Wilcox and Pottle & PLof may er, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 S.E. 474, 150 Ga. 811, 1921 Ga. LEXIS 398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elmore-v-southern-bank-trust-co-ga-1921.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack