Pinkston v. Garrason

174 S.E. 626, 178 Ga. 814, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 191
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 19, 1934
DocketNo. 9946
StatusPublished

This text of 174 S.E. 626 (Pinkston v. Garrason) 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
Pinkston v. Garrason, 174 S.E. 626, 178 Ga. 814, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 191 (Ga. 1934).

Opinion

Hutcheson, J.

The office of a writ of prohibition is to prevent an inferior judicatory or quasi-judicial officer from exceeding his jurisdiction. In this ease the county commissioners had jurisdiction of the matter with which they proposed to deal, and the writ of prohibition would not lie to prevent them from passing any order therein, regardless of whether such order might be erroneous. Consequently the court did not err in sustaining the general demurrer and dismissing the petition. Wright v. Wood, 178 Ga. 273 (173 S. E. 138).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concw, except Russell, 0. J., absent because of illness.

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

Related

Wright v. Wood
173 S.E. 138 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
174 S.E. 626, 178 Ga. 814, 1934 Ga. LEXIS 191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pinkston-v-garrason-ga-1934.