Goldberg v. Moore
This text of 119 S.E. 522 (Goldberg v. Moore) 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
As to the controlling principles involved in this case it differs in no matter of substance from the case of Cooney v. Walton, 151 Ga. 195 (106 S. E. 167), and the decision there rendered controls in the instant case.
(a) .The fact that the minors and the contingent remaindermen not in esse were made parties plaintiff by next friend and by those who represented them, under the ruling in the Cooney case, while in that case they were made parties defendant, did not affect the question of the jurisdiction of the court nor render the decree ineffectual as to the classes thus made parties.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
119 S.E. 522, 156 Ga. 683, 1923 Ga. LEXIS 307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldberg-v-moore-ga-1923.