Kirkland v. Ferris
Supreme Court of Georgia
Petition for injunction. Before Judge Wright. Floyd superior court. July 23, 1915.
1Opinion of the CourtLumpkin, J.
1. The granting and continuing of interlocutory injunctions must always rest in the sound discretion of the judge, according to the circumstances of each case. After an interlocutory injunction has been granted, the presiding judge in the exercise of a sound discretion may, for sufficient reason, vacate the order granting it, reopen the case, and rehear the application for injunction, affording both sides opportunity to be heard. Howard v. Lowell Machine Co., 75 Ga. 325; Smith v. Wells, 142 Ga. 774 (83 S. E. 789).
(а) ' The fact that the order granting the interlocutory injunction was entered…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Howard v. Lowell Machine Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1885
- Smith v. WellsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1914
- Coleman & Quillian v. FranklinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1858
3Cited by14 opinions
- Hogan v. HoganSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
- Middleton v. WatersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1949
- Zant v. DickSupreme Court of Georgia · 1982
- The GREYHOUND CORPORATION v. CloughSupreme Court of Georgia · 1955
- Reed v. WhiteSupreme Court of Georgia · 1951
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.