McLauchlin v. McLauchlin
This text of 58 S.E. 156 (McLauchlin v. McLauchlin) 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. An equitable petition praying for an injunction should be-verified. Civil Code, §§ 4965-4967; Boykin v. Epstein, 87 Ga. 25. Where a suit for divorce was filed by a husband against his wife, and she filed an answer in which she also, by way of cross-petition, prayed [654]*654for alimony and injunction, this should lidve been verified; and in so far as it prayed for extraordinary equitable relief it was subject to be stricken for want of verification. But where the judge issued an order nisi upon it, and it was then amended, setting up additional grounds and an additional prayer for injunction, and an affidavit was attached to the amendment, stating that “the facts stated in the above and foregoing amended plea are true,” there was no error in overruling a demurrer to a cross-petition as a whole for want of verification.
2. Under the evidence, there was no abuse of discretion in awarding temporary alimony and attorney’s fees.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
58 S.E. 156, 128 Ga. 653, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mclauchlin-v-mclauchlin-ga-1907.