Prater v. Barge

Supreme Court of Georgia

Prater v. Barge

78 S.E. 119, 139 Ga. 801, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 610

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 18, 1913

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 78 S.E. 119 (Prater v. Barge) 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

Prater v. Barge, 78 S.E. 119, 139 Ga. 801, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 610 (Ga. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

1. When a judgment refusing an interlocutory injunction is brought to the Supreme Court for review, the trial judge is authorized to grant a supersedeas upon such terms as may by him be deemed necessary to preserve the rights of the parties until the judgment of the Supreme Court can be had. Civil Code, § 5502. It is left, however, in the sound legal discretion of the judge to grant or refuse it. West v. Shackelford, 138 Ga. 163 (74 S. E. 1079).

(a) The jud"ge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to grant a supersedeas in this case.

2. There was no error in rejecting the evidence which the court excluded.

[802]*802April 18, 1913.

Petition for injunction. Before Judge Pendleton. Fulton superior court. November 4, 1912.

Phil W. Davis and J. S. James, for plaintiffs. L. Z. Rosser and P. H. Brewster, for defendants.

3. Under the pleadings and evidence there was no abuse of discretion in refusing to grant the interlocutory injunction as prayed.

Judgment affirpied.

All the Justices concur.

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