History
  • No items yet
midpage
Redwine v. Carr & Co.
164 Ga. 592
Ga.
1927
Check Treatment
Hill, J.

1. The petition set out a cause of action, and the court erred in sustaining the general demurrer. Kirkpatrick v. Holland, 148 Ga. 708.

2. It does not appear from the face of the petition that the plaintiff was . . guilty of such laches as that he was barred of recovery.

Judgment reversed on the main bill of exceptions, and affirmed on the cross-bill.

Injunctions, 32 C. J. p. 70, n. 47; p. 87, n. 7; p. 319, n. 31; p. 341, n. 3.

All the Justices concur. Hewlett & Dennis and E. W. Fountain, for plaintiff. Underwood & Haas and E. 8myth Gambrell, for defendants.

Case Details

Case Name: Redwine v. Carr & Co.
Court Name: Supreme Court of Georgia
Date Published: Jul 30, 1927
Citation: 164 Ga. 592
Docket Number: Nos. 5729, 5731
Court Abbreviation: Ga.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.