Legal Opinion

Ehrlich v. Teague

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided June 9, 1952No. 17878PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Almand, Justice.

The petition of the lessee, in so far as it seeks injunctive relief against the lessors’ instituting dispossessory proceedings, does not state a cause of action, for the reason that the lessee has an adequate remedy at law; and if, as he contends here, there has not been a forfeiture of the lease by his failure to pay or tender the monthly rental, such fact would constitute a good defense to a dispossessory proceeding. If the petition states a cause of action, it must be upon other grounds, such as (1) to prevent a multiplicity of suits or irreparable injury; or (2) to compel…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hamby & Toomer v. Georgia Iron & Coal Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1907
  2. Ford & Co. v. LawsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
  3. Candler v. SmythSupreme Court of Georgia · 1929
  4. Citizens Oil Company Inc. v. HeadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
  5. Gilleland v. WelchSupreme Court of Georgia · 1945

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Scruggs v. PurvisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1962
  2. Kirkland v. MorrisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
  3. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. MoodyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
  4. Kingsdale Apartments, Inc. v. Board of Lights & WaterworksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1963
  5. Lee v. PeckSupreme Court of Georgia · 1971

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API