Hendricks v. Jackson

77 S.E. 816, 139 Ga. 604, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 540
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided March 11, 1913·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

1. Under the conflicting evidence in this case, there was no abuse of discretion in refusing to grant the interlocutory injunction for which the plaintiff prayed.

2. In addition to the order denying the interlocutory injunction, the presiding judge filed a separate opinion in which he discussed the law and the evidence and 'the reasons affecting his mind in the refusal of the injunction. These statements did not amount to final adjudications, but merely gave the reasons of the presiding judge; and inasmuch as his judgment was not erroneous, whether or not all of his reasoning was sound, a reversal is not required.

Judgment affirmed.

Beelc, J., absent. The other Justice's concur.

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

Hendricks v. Jackson, 77 S.E. 816, 139 Ga. 604, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 540 (Ga. 1913).

77 S.E. 816 (Hendricks v. Jackson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thomas v. Mayor &C. of Savannah
76 S.E.2d 796 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1953)
Poole v. Arnold
2 S.E.2d 83 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Coker v. City of Atlanta
198 S.E. 74 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
Babb v. McKinnon
196 S.E. 488 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
White v. Cook
156 S.E. 657 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Dunaway v. Gore
138 S.E. 213 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1927)