Unity Cotton Mills v. Dunson

Supreme Court of Georgia

Unity Cotton Mills v. Dunson

62 S.E. 179, 131 Ga. 258, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 57

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedAugust 12, 1908

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 62 S.E. 179 (Unity Cotton Mills v. Dunson) 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

Unity Cotton Mills v. Dunson, 62 S.E. 179, 131 Ga. 258, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 57 (Ga. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Fish, O. J.

1. Under tlie pleadings and evidence in this case, there was no abuse of discretion in granting an ad interim injunction until the final hearing of the case.

2. The petition having prayed both for an ad interim injunction and for a decree perpetually enjoining the defendants, and the decree rendered on the interlocutory hearing having, adjudged “that the injunction prayed for be granted,” and that the defendants be enjoined, and exception being taken on the ground that this amounted to a final injunction, which the presiding judge could not grant on a preliminary hearing, direction is given that the decree be so amended as to show that it is not a perpetual injunction, but one to continue in force until the final hearing of the case.

Judgment affirmed, with direction.

All the Justices concur.

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

Fish, O. J.

1. Under tlie pleadings and evidence in this case, there was no abuse of discretion in granting an ad interim injunction until the final hearing of the case.

2. The petition having prayed both for an ad interim injunction and for a decree perpetually enjoining the defendants, and the decree rendered on the interlocutory hearing having, adjudged “that the injunction prayed for be granted,” and that the defendants be enjoined, and exception being taken on the ground that this amounted to a final injunction, which the presiding judge could not grant on a preliminary hearing, direction is given that the decree be so amended as to show that it is not a perpetual injunction, but one to continue in force until the final hearing of the case.

Judgment affirmed, with direction.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 S.E. 179, 131 Ga. 258, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 57, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/unity-cotton-mills-v-dunson-ga-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack