Slayton v. Etheredge

Supreme Court of Georgia

Slayton v. Etheredge

99 Ga. 138

DecidedJune 1, 1896

StatusPublished

This text of 99 Ga. 138 (Slayton v. Etheredge) 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

Slayton v. Etheredge, 99 Ga. 138 (Ga. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

Lumpkin, J.

The decision of this court in this case rendered at the March term, 1894 (94 Ga. 496), holding that the court below erred in granting an injunction, also in effect adjudicated that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the other relief sought by the petition, for the reason that the same was filed too late. This being so, and the amendment subsequently made to the petition not materially strengthening it, there was ño error in dismissing it on demurrer. Judgment affirmed.

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

Lumpkin, J.

The decision of this court in this case rendered at the March term, 1894 (94 Ga. 496), holding that the court below erred in granting an injunction, also in effect adjudicated that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the other relief sought by the petition, for the reason that the same was filed too late. This being so, and the amendment subsequently made to the petition not materially strengthening it, there was ño error in dismissing it on demurrer. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 Ga. 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slayton-v-etheredge-ga-1896.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack