Mayor C. of Hazlehurst v. Wilson

Supreme Court of Georgia

Mayor C. of Hazlehurst v. Wilson

52 S.E.2d 849, 205 Ga. 231, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 329

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 13, 1949

Docket16602.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 52 S.E.2d 849 (Mayor C. of Hazlehurst v. Wilson) 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

Mayor C. of Hazlehurst v. Wilson, 52 S.E.2d 849, 205 Ga. 231, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 329 (Ga. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Head, Justice.

1. The motion to dismiss the writ of error is denied. Where, after an interlocutory hearing, the trial judge passes an order continuing in effect a previous restraining order until the further order of the court, such order is in effect an interlocutory injunction and may be brought to this court by direct bill of exceptions. Grizzel v. Grizzel, 188 Ga. 418 (3 S. E. 2d, 649).

2. The petition alleges that the contract sought to be set aside is ultra vires and void. On this issue there are material conflicts in the evidence. “The granting and continuing of injunctions shall always rest in the sound discretion of the judge, according to the circumstances of each case.” Code, § 55-108. Where the evidence is in substantial conflict on material issues, it is not an abuse of discretion for the trial judge to continue in effect a previous restraining order on the hearing for interlocutory injunction.

3. The bill of exceptions recites that counsel for the plaintiffs in error moved to exclude certain evidence offered by the defendants in error, and that this motion was overruled. There is no assignment of error on this ruling in the bill of exceptions, and the order overruling the motion can not be reviewed in this court.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. *232 C. W. Heath, for plaintiffs in error. Gordon Knox Jr. and John Rogers, contra.

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

Head, Justice.

1. The motion to dismiss the writ of error is denied. Where, after an interlocutory hearing, the trial judge passes an order continuing in effect a previous restraining order until the further order of the court, such order is in effect an interlocutory injunction and may be brought to this court by direct bill of exceptions. Grizzel v. Grizzel, 188 Ga. 418 (3 S. E. 2d, 649).

2. The petition alleges that the contract sought to be set aside is ultra vires and void. On this issue there are material conflicts in the evidence. “The granting and continuing of injunctions shall always rest in the sound discretion of the judge, according to the circumstances of each case.” Code, § 55-108. Where the evidence is in substantial conflict on material issues, it is not an abuse of discretion for the trial judge to continue in effect a previous restraining order on the hearing for interlocutory injunction.

3. The bill of exceptions recites that counsel for the plaintiffs in error moved to exclude certain evidence offered by the defendants in error, and that this motion was overruled. There is no assignment of error on this ruling in the bill of exceptions, and the order overruling the motion can not be reviewed in this court.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. *232 C. W. Heath, for plaintiffs in error. Gordon Knox Jr. and John Rogers, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 S.E.2d 849, 205 Ga. 231, 1949 Ga. LEXIS 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayor-c-of-hazlehurst-v-wilson-ga-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack