Redwine v. Carr & Co.
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtHill, 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.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kirkpatrick v. HollandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1919
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smith v. WoodSupreme Court of Georgia · 1929
- Worley v. GastonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1954