Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

63 Ga. 347

Henry v. Elder

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided September 15, 1879

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1879-09-15

Corporations. Parties. Injunction. Mortgages. Before Judge Hillyer. DeKalb County. At Chambers. October 20, 1879. Elder, as administrator of his wife, hied his bill against Henry ei al. It alleged, in brief, as follows: The Stone Mountain Granite and Railway Co's, stock was divided into shares of $1,000 each. Of these W. A. Richardson held 58 shares, M. C. Richardson 15, J. F. Henry 5. All these live in Kentucky, the others in DeKalb county.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1879-09-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently January 2025

1 district · 3 state decisions

101879188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Warner, Chief Justice.

¶1This was a bill filed by the complainant against the defendants, with a prayer for an injunction on the allegations contained therein. On the hearing of the case, the chancellor, after considering the allegations in the bill, the defendants’ answer thereto, and the evidence contained in the record, granted the injunction prayed for, whereupon the defendants excepted.

¶2It appears from the record that the complainant was a stockholder in the “Stone Mountain Granite Company,” a corporation, and as such stockholder, was bound by the contracts made by the properly constituted officers and agents of that corporation when acting within the scope of its granted poweis, and was also bound, as such stockholder, by the judgment regularly obtained against it when service had been perfected upon the proper officers and agents of said corporation in the manner required by law, although the complainant may not, in his individual capacity, have had actual notice thereof. According to the rulings of this court in Blackman vs. The Central R. R. & Banking Co., and in Ware vs. Bazennore, 58 Ga., 189 and 216, the *349complainant, as a stockholder in said corporation, in view of the allegations contained in his bill, had no standing in court which would entitle him to the injunction prayed for. Let the judgement of the court below be reversed.

/63/ga/347 · .json · Public domain