174 Ga. 348 | Ga. | 1932
(After stating the foregoing facts.) We are of the opinion that this court is without jurisdiction to entertain this case. The suit is one at law against the defendants named for a stated sum, and for the amount stated the plaintiff prays for a judgment. Even if the case was originally an equitable suit of such a character as to give this court jurisdiction of the question raised by the demurrer, the equitable features thereof upon which the jurisdiction of this court might be based were removed by the amendments. It is true that a court of equity has concurrent jurisdiction with the court of ordinary over the settlement of accounts of administrators; and it is especially true that where there are involved and complicated accounts, and questions of misconduct and mismanagement of the estate are involved, the court of equity will take jurisdiction of the matter and proceed with .the accounting until the winding up of the estate; and it is therefore true, perhaps, as the petition stood when first filed, that it was an equitable suit, and a bill of exceptions to the ruling of the court in such a case might properly be sued but to this court. But, as we have pointed out above, the question of the settlement of the estate and of accounts was eliminated by the amendments; and so after these amendments the petition is one, in substance, alleging that the principal defendant and the sureties were liable to peti
Transferred to Court of Appeals.
