Mell v. Norton

Supreme Court of Georgia

Mell v. Norton

177 S.E. 557, 179 Ga. 871, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 429

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided December 12, 1934·No. No. 10315·Published

Opinion

Beck, P. J.

This was an equitable petition, which stated a cause of action good as against a general demurrer. The remedy at law was not as adequate as the equitable remedy sought; and the court erred in sustaining the general demurrer.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur, except Russell, O. J., who dissents. Brennan & Giles, for plaintiff. Louis U. Foster and Smith, Smith & Bloodworth, for defendants.

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

Beck, P. J.

This was an equitable petition, which stated a cause of action good as against a general demurrer. The remedy at law was not as adequate as the equitable remedy sought; and the court erred in sustaining the general demurrer.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur, except Russell, O. J., who dissents. Brennan & Giles, for plaintiff. Louis U. Foster and Smith, Smith & Bloodworth, for defendants.

Mell v. Norton, 177 S.E. 557, 179 Ga. 871, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 429 (Ga. 1934).

Pincite

177 S.E. 557 (Mell v. Norton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.