Moody v. Burrell

Supreme Court of Georgia

Moody v. Burrell

146 S.E. 753, 167 Ga. 834, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 44

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 13, 1929

DocketNo. 6686

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 146 S.E. 753 (Moody v. Burrell) 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

Moody v. Burrell, 146 S.E. 753, 167 Ga. 834, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 44 (Ga. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, J.

Upon conflicting evidence the judge did not err in denying an interlocutory injunction and in dissolving the temporary restraining order. Johnson v. Cantrell, 150 Ga. 114 (102 S. E. 821); Stephens v. Fitzgerald, 161 Ga. 842 (131 S. E. 885); Gray v. Chason, 158 Ga. 313 (123 S. E. 290). Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. J. G. & H. E. Edwards, for plaintiff. McMillan & Erwin, for defendant.

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

Hill, J.

Upon conflicting evidence the judge did not err in denying an interlocutory injunction and in dissolving the temporary restraining order. Johnson v. Cantrell, 150 Ga. 114 (102 S. E. 821); Stephens v. Fitzgerald, 161 Ga. 842 (131 S. E. 885); Gray v. Chason, 158 Ga. 313 (123 S. E. 290). Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. J. G. & H. E. Edwards, for plaintiff. McMillan & Erwin, for defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 S.E. 753, 167 Ga. 834, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moody-v-burrell-ga-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack