Ware v. Ware
Supreme Court of Georgia
Partition. Equity. Res Adjudicata. Before Judge Big-by. Troup Superior Court. September, 1870. . This was a bill to prevent waste, appoint a Receiver, etc. It is sufficiently reported in the opinion. While complainant was presenting the bill, defendants’ counsel moved to dismiss it. Plaintiff’s counsel said the motion was out of order. But the Court allowed defendants’ counsel to proceed.
Read the full summary
Partition. Equity. Res Adjudicata. Before Judge Big-by. Troup Superior Court. September, 1870. . This was a bill to prevent waste, appoint a Receiver, etc. It is sufficiently reported in the opinion. While complainant was presenting the bill, defendants’ counsel moved to dismiss it. Plaintiff’s counsel said the motion was out of order. But the Court allowed defendants’ counsel to proceed. His motion to dismiss was upon the grounds, that the matter was res adjudicata, as appeared by the exhibit to the bill, because there was no equity in this bill, and because complainant’s remedy was complete…
1Opinion of the CourtLochrane, C. J.
This case presents for review the order of the Judge below, granted at Chambers, October 18th, 1870, dismissing the bill of complainant.
The bill was brought by Mary S. Poythress, by her guardian, A. O. Ware, charging that Daniel Ware became the administrator of Sarah Jane Poythress in 1864, that in 1866, she had tiled her complaint in equity to Troup Superior Court, (which is attached as an exhibit,) against him, and had obtained thereon a verdict at the November Term, 1866, which *410we will recite as a statement of the case, and for the reason that the whole controversy now before us turns upon…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Whitfield v. People's Union Bank & Trust Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1934
- Ex parte BrienCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1874