Prater v. Barge
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- Howard v. Smith (Ga. 1970)
- Hutchins v. Howard (Ga. 1956)
- Hutchins v. Howard (Ga. 1955)
- Pope v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. (Ga. 1942)
- Peebles v. Perkins (Ga. 1927)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
1. When a judgment refusing an interlocutory injunction is brought to the Supreme Court for review, the trial judge is authorized to grant a supersedeas upon such terms as may by him be deemed necessary to preserve the rights of the parties until the judgment of the Supreme Court can be had. Civil Code, § 5502. It is left, however, in the sound legal discretion of the judge to grant or refuse it. West v. Shackelford, 138 Ga. 163 (74 S. E. 1079).
(a) The jud"ge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to grant a supersedeas in this case.
2. There was no error in rejecting the evidence which the court excluded.
3. Under the pleadings and evidence there was no abuse of discretion in refusing to grant the interlocutory injunction as prayed.
Judgment affirpied.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.