Moultrie Milk Shed Inc. v. City of Cairo
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Duckworth, Chief Justice.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) The defendants in error contend that the present action is in essence an attempt to enjoin criminal prosecutions, and cite many decisions of this court in support of the statement that equity will not interfere with the administration of criminal law. In Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Columbus, 189 Ga. 458 (6 S. E. 2d, 320), and again in City of Albany v. Lippitt, 191 Ga. 756 (13 S. E. 2d, 807), we undertook to put at rest all uncertainty as to the circumstances under which equity would enjoin a criminal prosecution. It was…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. City of ColumbusSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- City of Albany v. LippittSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
- Prescott v. City of BorgerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1942
- LaFranchi v. City of Santa RosaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- Wallace v. City of AtlantaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Goldrush II v. City of MariettaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1997
- Harris v. Entertainment Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1989
- K. Gordon Murray Productions, Inc. v. FloydSupreme Court of Georgia · 1962
- Hughes v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1967
- Mayor &C. of Athens v. Co-Op Cab Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1951
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.