Gill v. Gill

87 S.E.2d 389, 211 Ga. 567, 1955 Ga. LEXIS 391
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 9, 1955
Docket18928
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 87 S.E.2d 389 (Gill v. Gill) 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
Gill v. Gill, 87 S.E.2d 389, 211 Ga. 567, 1955 Ga. LEXIS 391 (Ga. 1955).

Opinion

Head, Justice.

1. “A court of equity shall have concurrent jurisdiction with the ordinary over the settlement of accounts of administrators.” Code § 113-2203. Equity will not interfere with the regular administration of estates at the instance of an heir except where there is danger of loss or other injury to his interest. Code § 37-403. “Where law and equity have concurrent jurisdiction, whichever first takes jurisdiction shall retain it, unless a good reason shall be given for the interference of equity.” Code § 37-122.

2. The petition fails to show that the available remedies at law are made[568]*568quate. Code § 113-1229. The present case falls squarely within the rulings of this court in Hoffman v. Chester, 204 Ga. 296 (49 S. E. 2d 760), Hamrick v. Hamrick, 206 Ga. 564 (58 S. E. 2d 145), Salter v. Salter, 209 Ga. 511 (74 S. E. 2d 241), and Turner v. Turner, 210 Ga. 586 (82 S. E. 2d 137).

Submitted April 11, 1955 Decided May 9, 1955. Robert W. Reynolds, for plaintiff in error. J. Lundie Smith, B. Lamar Tillman, Theo. W. Coleman, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, P. J., absent on account of illness.

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

Related

Lee v. Lee
392 S.E.2d 870 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
87 S.E.2d 389, 211 Ga. 567, 1955 Ga. LEXIS 391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gill-v-gill-ga-1955.