History
  • No items yet
midpage
Sanders v. Ballard
160 Ga. 366
Ga.
1925
Check Treatment
Gilbert, J.

1. No citizen or taxpayer, as such, has the right to institute in his own name an equitable petition against a public officer acting within the scope of his authority for or in behalf of the State of Georgia, unless it should appear that the public diity was one owing to individuals, and unless it is shown that the petitioner has suffered some special and peculiar injury from the wrongful act of *367which he complains. Peeples v. Byrd, 98 Ga. 688, 696 (25 S. E. 677); Southern Mining Co. v. Lowe, 105 Ga. 352, 356 (31 S. E. 191); Hudspeth v. Hall, 113 Ga. 4, 7 (38 S. E. 358, 84 Am. St. R. 200); Davison-Nicholson Co. v. Pound, 147 Ga. 447 (4 a) (94 S. E. 560).

No. 4740. April 20, 1925.

2. Under the allegations of the petition no such special and peculiar injury from the wrongful act of which complaint is made is shown; and therefore the court did not err in sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the petition. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. B. O. StarJc, for plaintiffs. George M. Napier, attorney-general, and J. B. G. Logan, for defendant.

Case Details

Case Name: Sanders v. Ballard
Court Name: Supreme Court of Georgia
Date Published: Apr 20, 1925
Citation: 160 Ga. 366
Docket Number: No. 4740
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.