Vance v. Vogel

167 S.E. 112, 176 Ga. 132, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 404
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided December 15, 1932·No. No. 8972·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Russell, O. J.

To a petition in which the petitioners asked that the writ of injunction ■ issue to restrain the defendants from interfering with petitioners’ right of possession of named premises, the defendants interposed certain demurrers seeking dismissal of the action. The court entered no judgment upon the demurrers, but after consideration of evidence presented by both parties granted an interlocutory injunction “until further order of the court.” In the circumstances and the state of the record we can not hold that there was an abuse of discretion in the grant of the order to which exception is taken, or that the court erred therein. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. George G. Dean and Marion Williamson, for plaintiff in error. Poole & Fraser, contra.

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

Vance v. Vogel, 167 S.E. 112, 176 Ga. 132, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 404 (Ga. 1932).

167 S.E. 112 (Vance v. Vogel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Harbuck v. Harbuck
78 S.E.2d 508 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1953)
Sachs v. Dempsey
47 S.E.2d 326 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1948)