Young v. Brown
This text of 1 Ga. L. Rep. 163 (Young v. Brown) 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.
Opinion
The principle that where law and equity have con■current jurisdiction the court first taking it will retain it, has this important qualification, namely, unless good reason can be given for the interference of equity. Code, §3096.
(a) Several good reasons for equitable interference appeared in in this case. There are numerous parties defendant to the bill who are not parties to the suit in court of ordinary, and the administrator can not be forced to cite all parties interested in an estate to appear for settlement, nor can the ordinary bring them all into court; two estates are to be settled, and the ordinary can not try both questions together; the defendants are called upon to interplead and settle their respective rights as to the two estates; an appeal from the Court of Ordinary may multiply litigation; the administrator and citation for ¡settlement are in one county, while the administration íesides in another, and the proper venue is in the county of his residence and where two of the defendants also reside, the other defendants being scattered in other counties and other States. Code,, §§2600, 2598, 5172, 5167 — 5171; Const., art. •6, sec. 16.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Ga. L. Rep. 163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/young-v-brown-ga-1885.