Legal Opinion

Smith v. Wood

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided May 14, 1938No. 12269PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Atkinson, Presiding' Justice.

1. “An interlocutory injunction, which, if enforced, would result in the dispossession of the defendant and the admission of the plaintiff into possession of the premises in controversy, is in legal effect a mandatory injunction and the relief afforded by this injunctive order is not, under our law, within the proper scope of the writ of injunction.” Glover v. Newsome, 134 Ga. 375 (67 S. E. 935), and cit.; Mize v. Herring, 137 Ga. 812 (74 S. E. 534); Wilkes v. Folsom, 149 Ga. 512 (101 S. E. 185); Hopkins v. Vance, 153 Ga. 754 (113 S. E. 157); Trudie Turpentine Co.…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Blaylock v. HackelSupreme Court of Georgia · 1927
  2. Mackenzie v. MinisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
  3. Cannon v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Georgia · 1937
  4. Burns v. HaleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
  5. Marshall v. MatthewsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1919

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Smith v. WoodSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
  2. Braswell v. PalmerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
  3. Slaughter v. LandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
  4. Wood v. HayesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
  5. Shobkov v. PenningtonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1961

1 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