Magbee v. City of Atlanta

Supreme Court of Georgia

Magbee v. City of Atlanta

180 S.E. 485, 180 Ga. 733, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 544

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 13, 1935

DocketNo. 10829

StatusPublished

This text of 180 S.E. 485 (Magbee v. City of Atlanta) 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

Magbee v. City of Atlanta, 180 S.E. 485, 180 Ga. 733, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 544 (Ga. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

Gilbert, Justice.

The City of Atlanta brought a proceeding in the recorder's court against T. G. Magbee,. to abate a nuisance. The penal features of the proceeding were abandoned. Magbee sued out in the superior court a petition for the writ of prohibition to prevent the recorder from proceeding with the case. The writ was denied. Magbee excepted.

1. “A writ of prohibition is never granted where there is any other legal remedy; and here the applicant for the writ had a complete remedy by making defense before the recorder of the City of Atlanta, against whom the writ was sought, and by way of certiorari in case of an erroneous adverse decision.” Hudson v. Preston, 134 Ga. 222 (67 S. E. 800); Heaton v. Hooper, 134 Ga. 577 (68 S. E. 297); Cunningham v. Rachaels, 146 Ga. 682 (92 S. E. 208); City of Macon v. Anderson, 155 Ga. 607 (2), 613 (117 S. E. 753).

2. The Code of 1933, § 72-401, provides an adequate and complete remedy in the present case.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Gilbert, Justice.

The City of Atlanta brought a proceeding in the recorder's court against T. G. Magbee,. to abate a nuisance. The penal features of the proceeding were abandoned. Magbee sued out in the superior court a petition for the writ of prohibition to prevent the recorder from proceeding with the case. The writ was denied. Magbee excepted.

1. “A writ of prohibition is never granted where there is any other legal remedy; and here the applicant for the writ had a complete remedy by making defense before the recorder of the City of Atlanta, against whom the writ was sought, and by way of certiorari in case of an erroneous adverse decision.” Hudson v. Preston, 134 Ga. 222 (67 S. E. 800); Heaton v. Hooper, 134 Ga. 577 (68 S. E. 297); Cunningham v. Rachaels, 146 Ga. 682 (92 S. E. 208); City of Macon v. Anderson, 155 Ga. 607 (2), 613 (117 S. E. 753).

2. The Code of 1933, § 72-401, provides an adequate and complete remedy in the present case.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

180 S.E. 485, 180 Ga. 733, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 544, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/magbee-v-city-of-atlanta-ga-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack