Harrell v. Cane Growers Co-Operative Ass'n
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Per curiam
1. The title of the eo-operative marketing act (Acts 1921, p. 139) is sufficiently broad to include the provisions of sections 3, 4, 5, 15, and 23 of said act; and for that reason said sections are not void as in violation of article 3, section 7, paragraph 8, of the constitution of Georgia.
2. So much of section 15 of the acts of 1921, referred to in the preceding division, as seeks to authorize the by-laws and marketing contract to fix liquidated damages and to require the members to pay all costs, premiums for bonds, expenses and fees, ■ as well as providing for injunction and a decree of…
2Cited by20 opinions
- United States v. Rock Royal Co-Operative, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Liberty Warehouse Co. v. Burley Tobacco Growers' Co-Operative Marketing Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
- In the Interest of M. A. C.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1979
- South Georgia Natural Gas Co. v. Georgia Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Georgia · 1958
- Bitting v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1927
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.