Hornsby v. Smith
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Duckworth, Justice?!
If the alleged conduct of the defendant constitutes a continuing nuisance as defined in the Code, § 72-101, the plaintiff is entitled to equitable relief. Code, § 55-101; Russell v. Napier, 80 Ga. 77 (4 S. E. 857); Spencer v. Tumlin, 155 Ga. 341 (116 S. E. 600) ; Phinizy v. Gardner, 159 Ga. 136 (125 S. E. 195); Rosser v. Styron, 171 Ga. 238 (155 S. E. 23); 2 C. J. S. 46, § 52 (b). But,jin reaching a solution of the main question, we encounter the” following questions: (a) whether the defendant’s right to make use of her land is qualified or absolute, (b) whether the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- American Bank & Trust Co. v. Federal Reserve Bank of AtlantaSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Burke v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Flaherty v. MoranMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Metzger v. HochreinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Barger v. . BarringerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Prah v. MarettiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
- Poultryland Inc. v. AndersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
- Tucker v. Howard L. Carmichael & Sons Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1951
- National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. OverstreetSupreme Court of Georgia · 1965
- Peacock v. PeacockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.