Legal Opinion

Cone v. Jones

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided January 9, 1934No. 9764PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

1. It affirmatively appears from the statement of facts herewith reported that the court has not ordered payment of any of the accounts or demands rendered. The court expressly refused to approve or disapprove for payment any of such demands on the application for an interlocutory injunction.

2. The Civil Code (1910), § 4872, provides that any such expenses “shall be paid out of the county treasury, . . upon the certificate of the judge of the superior court,” as a part of the expenses of the court. Chatham County v. Gaudry, 120 Ga. 121 (47 S. E. 634) ; Watkins v. Tift, 177 Ga. 640 (170 S. E.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Chatham County v. GaudrySupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
  2. Long v. Railroad CommissionSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
  3. Watkins v. TiftSupreme Court of Georgia · 1933
  4. Georgia Public Service Commission v. Camel Lines Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1933

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Behr v. City of MacOnSupreme Court of Georgia · 1942
  2. Wall v. HumphriesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  3. McLarty v. Fulton CountyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API