Fitzgerald v. Bowen
This text of 40 S.E. 735 (Fitzgerald v. Bowen) 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
1. One who had full knowledge of the pendency of a case in which he had a direct pecuniary interest, and neither sought to become a party thereto nor made any effort to intervene therein, so-as to protect his rights, can not, after the rendition of a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in such suit, maintain an equitable petition to set such judgment abide or restrain its enforcement.
2. Applying the rule announced above to the evidence disclosed by the record in the present case, the judge erred in granting an interlocutory injunction.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
40 S.E. 735, 114 Ga. 691, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 763, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fitzgerald-v-bowen-ga-1902.