Etowah Manufacturing & Mining Co. v. Dobbins & Co.

68 Ga. 823
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided February 15, 1882·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

1. The harsh remedy of injunction will only be granted when necessary to protect some right or interest of the party complaining which would otherwise be seriously injured or impaired. High on Inj., §§9, 10 and citations.

2. If a suit be proceeding without service, no legal judgment can be rendered, and injunction is not necessary against it.

3. That an agent without authority made promissory notes for his principal and the holder took them with notice of such want of authority, can be urged in defence to an action on the notes without an injunction to stay the suit.

4. If promissory notes have been discharged by substituting another note in their place, this does not require an'injunction to restrain a suit on such notes.

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

Etowah Manufacturing & Mining Co. v. Dobbins & Co., 68 Ga. 823 (Ga. 1882).

68 Ga. 823 (Etowah Manufacturing & Mining Co. v. Dobbins & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Quinton v. Equitable Inv. Co.
196 F. 314 (Ninth Circuit, 1912)