McKenzie v. Emanuel Farm Co.
This text of 129 S.E. 89 (McKenzie v. Emanuel Farm 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.
Opinion
1. Conceding that the allegations of the petition make a case entitling the plaintiffs to the equitable relief prayed, these allegations are denied by the sworn answer of the defendants; and the evidence introduced upon the issue thus raised being in conflict, this court will not disturb the judgment of the trial judge denying a temporary injunction, it not being made to appear that there was an abuse of discretion. Bennett v. Dickey, 159 Ga. 267 (125 S. E. 455).
2. The issues of law and fact can all be threshed out upon the final hearing. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
129 S.E. 89, 160 Ga. 848, 1925 Ga. LEXIS 277, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckenzie-v-emanuel-farm-co-ga-1925.