Bryan & Hunter v. King
Supreme Court of Georgia
Injunction. Jurisdiction. Venue. Husband and wife. Separate estate. Notice. Before Judge Harris. Pulaski county. At Chambers. October 20th, 1873. This case is sufficiently reported in the opinion. I. The demurrer for want of jurisdiction in the court should have been sustained : Code, 4132 ; 27 Ga., 353. 1st. No question of title to land is involved in the controversy : Smith vs. Bryan, 34 Ga., 53, 61, 62. 2d. No “substantial relief” is sought against King.
Read the full summary
Injunction. Jurisdiction. Venue. Husband and wife. Separate estate. Notice. Before Judge Harris. Pulaski county. At Chambers. October 20th, 1873. This case is sufficiently reported in the opinion. I. The demurrer for want of jurisdiction in the court should have been sustained : Code, 4132 ; 27 Ga., 353. 1st. No question of title to land is involved in the controversy : Smith vs. Bryan, 34 Ga., 53, 61, 62. 2d. No “substantial relief” is sought against King. The amended bill, pretending to pursue him as the agent of plaintiffs in error, did not give jurisdiction to the court: Taylor vs. Cloud,…
1Opinion of the Court
McCay, Judge.
1. This case has its origin and its complications from the act of 1866, providing that property coming to the wife dur*293ing coverture shall not go to the husband but to her. Here seems to have been a handsome estate, distributed by-agreement among the heirs-at-law to the wife and her husband jointly, as though under the law it belonged to both. It seems to have gone into the hands of the husband without any objection by anybody, and to have been used at his discretion. It was partly in money and partly in property. The wife seems to have joined with her husband in turning the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- First National Bank v. HoldernessSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
- Martin v. GaissertSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
- King v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1877