Haygood v. Brown

Supreme Court of Georgia

Haygood v. Brown

75 S.E. 1120, 138 Ga. 778, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 709

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 15, 1912

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 75 S.E. 1120 (Haygood v. Brown) 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

Haygood v. Brown, 75 S.E. 1120, 138 Ga. 778, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 709 (Ga. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Fish, C. J.

1. When a bill of exceptions assigning error upon the refusal of an interlocutory injunction was certified by the judge and filed in the office of the clerk of the superior court, a document purporting to be an agreed brief of the oral and documentary evidence, which was presented to the judge and approved by him as a correct brief of the evidence submitted on the hearing, and which was so presented and approved subsequently to the certification and filing of the bill of exceptions, can not be considered by this court as a brief of evidence. See Eubank v. Mayor etc. of Eastman, 120 Ga. 1048 (48 S. E. 426); Glover v. State, 128 Ga. 1 (57 S. E. 101); Jackson v. Georgia etc. R. Co., 132 Ga. 127, 134 (63 S. E. 841).

2. It 'appears that the material allegations of fact in the verified petition were denied on oath in the answer of the defendants, and the parties were at issue; and therefore this court can not adjudge that the trial judge abused his discretion in refusing an interlocutory injunction. See St. Amand v. Lehman, 120 Ga. 253 (47 S. E. 949).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Fish, C. J.

1. When a bill of exceptions assigning error upon the refusal of an interlocutory injunction was certified by the judge and filed in the office of the clerk of the superior court, a document purporting to be an agreed brief of the oral and documentary evidence, which was presented to the judge and approved by him as a correct brief of the evidence submitted on the hearing, and which was so presented and approved subsequently to the certification and filing of the bill of exceptions, can not be considered by this court as a brief of evidence. See Eubank v. Mayor etc. of Eastman, 120 Ga. 1048 (48 S. E. 426); Glover v. State, 128 Ga. 1 (57 S. E. 101); Jackson v. Georgia etc. R. Co., 132 Ga. 127, 134 (63 S. E. 841).

2. It 'appears that the material allegations of fact in the verified petition were denied on oath in the answer of the defendants, and the parties were at issue; and therefore this court can not adjudge that the trial judge abused his discretion in refusing an interlocutory injunction. See St. Amand v. Lehman, 120 Ga. 253 (47 S. E. 949).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 S.E. 1120, 138 Ga. 778, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haygood-v-brown-ga-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack