Stone Man, Inc. v. Green
Supreme Court of Georgia
1DissentSears, Justice
As I conclude that the majority has erred in holding that the doctrine of res judicata bars Green’s present action, I dissent to the majority opinion.
The majority predicates its res judicata holding on its determination that the trial court’s initial injunction was “a final judicial determination that operation of the quarry in accordance with the imposed limitations does not constitute an actionable nuisance.” Majority opinion at 878. (Emphasis in majority opinion.) I believe, however, that the majority mischaracterizes the trial court’s holding. In fact, the trial court itself has made…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. United Shoe MacHinery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Stone Man, Inc. v. GreenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1993
- Cobb County v. BuchananSupreme Court of Georgia · 1992