Summary
In Tift v. Bank of Tifton, 60 Ga. App. 563 (4 S.E.2d 495) we held that Code Ann. § 3-805 "does not have reference to the period of time in which a judgment becomes dormant when not kept in life in any manner specified by law.
Summary of this case from Stanley v. StanleyOpinion
18275.
SUBMITTED JULY 13, 1953.
DECIDED SEPTEMBER 14, 1953.
Injunction. Before Judge Forehand. Tift Superior Court. May 12, 1953.
R. D. Smith, Bob Reinhardt, for plaintiffs in error.
Gibson DeLoache, Robert R. Forrester, contra.
This litigation involves the right to use an alley without interference, and the exception is to a judgment denying an interlocutory injunction. The grant or denial of such an injunction rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge, according to the circumstances of each case (Code § 55-108); and, where the evidence is conflicting, his decision will not be controlled by this court unless it is apparent that he has abused the discretion which the law gives him. Deriso v. Castleberry, 202 Ga. 174 ( 42 S.E.2d 356). In the case at bar the evidence is in conflict and no abuse of discretion appears. Hence the record fails to show error. See Fletcher v. Clements, 147 Ga. 754 ( 95 S.E. 285); Vickers v. City of Gainesville, 177 Ga. 793 ( 171 S.E. 299); Jones v. Lanier Development Co., 188 Ga. 141, 145 ( 2 S.E.2d 923).
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, P.J., not participating.