Case Name: SHARP-BOYLSTON COMPANY et al. v. HALDANE
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1936-07-11
Citations: 182 Ga. 833
Docket Number: No. 10995
Parties: SHARP-BOYLSTON COMPANY et al. v. HALDANE.
Judges: All the Justices concur except Russell, O. J., and Bell, J., who cKssent, and Gilbert, J., absent.
Reporter: Georgia Reports
Volume: 182
Pages: 833–844

Head Matter:
SHARP-BOYLSTON COMPANY et al. v. HALDANE.
No. 10995.
July 11, 1936.
Adhered to on rehearing July 28, 1936.
Harold Hirsch, Marion Smith, and Wilis <& Bell, for plaintiffs in error.
Sydney H. Baynes, contra. Stephens Mitchell, William K. Meadow, James D. Childs, Robert S. Sams, and Madison Richardson, as amici curiae.

Opinion:
Pee Curiam.
Assuming that tlie plaintiff, as an attorney at law, had such interest in the subject-matter of the litigation as to authorize him to institute the action, the evidence (consisting of the pleadings and an agreed statement) was insufficient to show that the defendant corporation and its agent were engaged in the practice of law. Eor this reason the court erred in granting an injunction.
Judgment reversed.
All the Justices concur except Russell, O. J., and Bell, J., who cKssent, and Gilbert, J., absent.