Kent v. Lane

147 S.E. 61, 168 Ga. 133, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 90
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided February 19, 1929·No. No. 6689·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Hill, J.

In a suit by a remainderman to enjoin the lessees of the life-tenant from working certain trees for turpentine purposes by hacking, chipping, and cupping the pine trees, the judge did not err at an interlocutory hearing, under the pleadings and the evidence, in passing an order the effect of which was to grant an injunction, but to permit the defendants to continue working the trees upon giving a bond to be approved by the clerk of the court, as provided in the order. Farrar Lumber Co. v. Andrews Co., 150 Ga. 252 (103 S. E. 494); Gleaton v. Aultman, 150 Ga. 768 (105 S. E. 445) ; Lee & Bradshaw v. Rogers, 151 Ga. 838 (1, 2) (108 S. E. 371).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Kent v. Lane, 147 S.E. 61, 168 Ga. 133, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 90 (Ga. 1929).

147 S.E. 61 (Kent v. Lane) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Collins v. Mills
30 S.E.2d 866 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1944)
United States v. Turner Turpentine Co.
111 F.2d 400 (Fifth Circuit, 1940)
Butler Naval Stores Co. v. Glass
200 S.E. 286 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)