Gray v. Wright
51 S.E. 373, 123 Ga. 295, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 446
Opinion
1. A consent decree will not be set aside because, “ through accident and mistake,” one of the consenting parties failed to introduce evidence which was in his possession and which might, if submitted on a trial, have resulted in the rendition of a decree different from the one which was taken by consent.
2. It is not error to refuse to entertain a petition to enjoin the cutting of timber on land which, by a decree to which the plaintiff consented, has been legally adjudged to be the property of the defendant.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Gray v. Wright, 51 S.E. 373, 123 Ga. 295, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 446 (Ga. 1905).
51 S.E. 373 (Gray v. Wright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Estes v. Estes
14 S.E.2d 681 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)