McConnell Bros. v. Jones Naval Stores Co.

Supreme Court of Georgia

McConnell Bros. v. Jones Naval Stores Co.

54 S.E. 117, 125 Ga. 376, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 163

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMay 14, 1906

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 54 S.E. 117 (McConnell Bros. v. Jones Naval Stores Co.) 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

McConnell Bros. v. Jones Naval Stores Co., 54 S.E. 117, 125 Ga. 376, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 163 (Ga. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Cobb, P. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The averments of the petition, which was properly verified, were sufficient to make a case of irreparable damage. Camp v. Dixon, 112 Ga. 872. Such being the case, neither an allegation of insolvency nor a showing that the plaintiff had a perfect paper title was necessary. The answer, which was also properly verified, denied nearly all of the material allegations of the petition. The evidence in the affidavits produced at the hearing was conflicting. There was no abuse of discretion in granting the interlocutory injunction, upon the condition required. Even if the averments of the answer were sufficient to authorize the granting of an injunction at the instance of the defendants, there was no prayer in the answer for such relief. In Johnson v. Hall, 83 Ga. 281, there was a prayer for injunction by each party. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Cobb, P. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The averments of the petition, which was properly verified, were sufficient to make a case of irreparable damage. Camp v. Dixon, 112 Ga. 872. Such being the case, neither an allegation of insolvency nor a showing that the plaintiff had a perfect paper title was necessary. The answer, which was also properly verified, denied nearly all of the material allegations of the petition. The evidence in the affidavits produced at the hearing was conflicting. There was no abuse of discretion in granting the interlocutory injunction, upon the condition required. Even if the averments of the answer were sufficient to authorize the granting of an injunction at the instance of the defendants, there was no prayer in the answer for such relief. In Johnson v. Hall, 83 Ga. 281, there was a prayer for injunction by each party. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 S.E. 117, 125 Ga. 376, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcconnell-bros-v-jones-naval-stores-co-ga-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack