Carroll v. Martin
Supreme Court of Georgia
Motion to Dissolve Injunction. Decided by Judge Hansjbll. At Chambers. August, 1866. The bill alleged, a partnership between the complainant and the defendants in two kilns of brick, and an injunction was granted to secure the complainant’s alleged interest in the proceeds of both.
Read the full summary
Motion to Dissolve Injunction. Decided by Judge Hansjbll. At Chambers. August, 1866. The bill alleged, a partnership between the complainant and the defendants in two kilns of brick, and an injunction was granted to secure the complainant’s alleged interest in the proceeds of both. The answer denied the partnership as to the second kiln, setting up that the partnership had previously been dissolved in consequence of a failure by the complainant to pay in capital according to his original undertaking. The presiding Judge dissolved the injunction, except as to matters touching the first kiln,…
1Opinion of the CourtHarris, J.
To have retained the injunction against the defendant as to the second kiln of bricks would, to some extent, have carried along with an order, after the motion made to dissolve, an implication that complainant had an unquestionable interest as a co-partner in said second kiln. That is a main point in controversy between the parties. The Judge acted discreetly in refusing to retain the injunction as to that kiln, from the facts as exhibited in the record. The question whether plaintiff had not distinctly withdrawn from the co-partnersjiip in the brick-making business, before defendants entered…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Markham v. HuffSupreme Court of Georgia · 1884