Case ID: ga_29/html/0490-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "— Benning J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Robert Buchanan, plaintiff in error, vs. Francis M. Ford, defendant in error. Moore & Thomas, plaintiffs in error, vs. Robert Buchanan, defendant in error.
    A judgment in a matter of discretion, ought not to be disturbed, without - a. ■strong reason.
    In Equity, in Cass Superior Court. Decisions at chambers, by Judge Crook,May, 1859.
    
      These two cases were heard and argued together, and the decision of this Court being predicated upon a general principle or rule of law, relating to the discretion of the presiding Judge or Chancellor, it is deemed unnecessary to state all the facts contained in two voluminous records.
    Akin, for Buchanan.
    Milner & Parrott, contra.
    
   — Benning J.

By the Court.

delivering the opinion.

Dissolving or retaining injunctions is very much matter of discretion. We see no sufficient reason to justify interference with the way in which the discretion was exercised in these two cases. Therefore we shall not interfere. A judgment in a matter of discretion ought not to be disturbed without a strong reason.

Judgments affirmed.