Stevenson v. City of Atlanta

Supreme Court of Georgia

Stevenson v. City of Atlanta

167 S.E.2d 151, 225 Ga. 190, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 423

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 20, 1969

Docket25078

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 167 S.E.2d 151 (Stevenson v. City of Atlanta) 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

Stevenson v. City of Atlanta, 167 S.E.2d 151, 225 Ga. 190, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 423 (Ga. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Grice, Justice.

This court’s jurisdiction of this appeal is predicated upon the case being one in equity. For a case to be one for equity jurisdiction it must contain both allegations and prayers for equitable relief. Hudon v. North Atlanta, 219 Ga. 179 (132 SE2d 74). Here, there is no allegation as to any need for equitable relief or as to the inadequacy of remedies at law. The only allegation relating to equitable relief is the complainant’s statement that it is brought “pursuant to 110 Ga. Code 1101 et seq. for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief.” In this situation, the fact that there are prayers for injunctive relief does not make the case an equity one. What was said in Hudon v. North Atlanta, 219 Ga. 179, supra, is applicable here: “While there is a prayer for permanent injunction, the allegations are insufficient to authorize the grant of such relief, and if such a prayer alone determined jurisdiction, litigants could require this court to review every case as being within the jurisdiction of the court as an equity matter by adding such a spurious prayer.”

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur. *191 Argued March 10, 1969 Decided March 20, 1969. Albert M. Horn, for appellant. Roberts. Wiggins, for appellee.

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

Grice, Justice.

This court’s jurisdiction of this appeal is predicated upon the case being one in equity. For a case to be one for equity jurisdiction it must contain both allegations and prayers for equitable relief. Hudon v. North Atlanta, 219 Ga. 179 (132 SE2d 74). Here, there is no allegation as to any need for equitable relief or as to the inadequacy of remedies at law. The only allegation relating to equitable relief is the complainant’s statement that it is brought “pursuant to 110 Ga. Code 1101 et seq. for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief.” In this situation, the fact that there are prayers for injunctive relief does not make the case an equity one. What was said in Hudon v. North Atlanta, 219 Ga. 179, supra, is applicable here: “While there is a prayer for permanent injunction, the allegations are insufficient to authorize the grant of such relief, and if such a prayer alone determined jurisdiction, litigants could require this court to review every case as being within the jurisdiction of the court as an equity matter by adding such a spurious prayer.”

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur. *191 Argued March 10, 1969 Decided March 20, 1969. Albert M. Horn, for appellant. Roberts. Wiggins, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 S.E.2d 151, 225 Ga. 190, 1969 Ga. LEXIS 423, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevenson-v-city-of-atlanta-ga-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack