Nash v. Cowart

133 S.E. 263, 162 Ga. 236, 1926 Ga. LEXIS 149
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 13, 1926
DocketNo. 5146
StatusPublished

This text of 133 S.E. 263 (Nash v. Cowart) 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
Nash v. Cowart, 133 S.E. 263, 162 Ga. 236, 1926 Ga. LEXIS 149 (Ga. 1926).

Opinion

Hill, J.

The allegations of the petition were insufficient to authorize the intervention of a court of equity. Civil Code (1910), § 4596; see Spooner v. Bank of Donalsonville, 159 Ga. 295 (125 S. E. 456), as to statement of the general rule. The judge did not err in refusing a temporary injunction.

Judgment affirmed.

All Hie Justices concur.

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

Related

Spooner v. Bank of Donalsonville
125 S.E. 456 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
133 S.E. 263, 162 Ga. 236, 1926 Ga. LEXIS 149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nash-v-cowart-ga-1926.