Legal Opinion

Ewing v. Tanner

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided October 15, 1937No. 11919PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hutcheson, Justice.

The petition, while referred to as a bill of interpleader, does not come within the purview of such a proceeding as defined in the Code, § 37-1503. See Manufacturers Finance Co. v. Jones Co., 141 Ga. 619 (b) (81 S. E. 1033); *779Phillips v. Kelly, 176 Ga. 111 (167 S. E. 381). Whether it is one in the nature of a bill of interpleader (see Phillips v. Kelly, supra), or a bill of peace (Code, § 37-1501), we do not decide, there being no demurrer to the petition, and no question raised as to the right of the plaintiff to proceed as was done in the instant case. We therefore take…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Blocker v. BoswellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  2. Lathrop v. LevarnSupreme Court of Vermont · 1909
  3. Cozart v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1935
  4. Phillips v. KellySupreme Court of Georgia · 1932
  5. Manufacturers Finance Co. v. Jones Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1914

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Hasty v. WilsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1967
  2. Olsen v. NobleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953
  3. Allen v. AllenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
  4. Seignious v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit AuthoritySupreme Court of Georgia · 1984
  5. Frye v. Commonwealth Investment Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1963

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API