From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Anthony v. City of Atlanta

Supreme Court of Georgia
Sep 26, 1940
11 S.E.2d 197 (Ga. 1940)

Opinion

13510.

SEPTEMBER 26, 1940.

Petition for injunction. Before Judge Pomeroy. Fulton superior court. July 24, 1940.

Morgan Belser and Philip Etheridge, for plaintiff.

Bertram S. Boley, for persons at interest.

J. C. Savage, E. L. Sterne, J. C. Murphy, and F. A. Hooper Jr., for defendants.


Petition for injunction against enforcement of penal prosecutions for violating municipal ordinance fixing hours and prices to be charged by operators of beauty shops, held demurrable.

No. 13510. SEPTEMBER 26, 1940.


An equitable petition was brought by B. Anthony, the owner and operator of a beauty-shop known as Anthony Permanent Waving Salon, against the City of Atlanta et al., seeking to enjoin enforcement of the penal provisions of an ordinance fixing hours of work and minimum prices to be charged by operators of such beauty-shops for specified services, and to enjoin threatened criminal prosecutions for violations thereof. There appears to be nothing alleged which takes the case out of the general rule that courts of equity will not enjoin a criminal prosecution. The judgment sustaining the demurrer to the petition is affirmed. See Powell v. Hartsfield, 190 Ga. 839. Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, P. J., who dissents.


Summaries of

Anthony v. City of Atlanta

Supreme Court of Georgia
Sep 26, 1940
11 S.E.2d 197 (Ga. 1940)
Case details for

Anthony v. City of Atlanta

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY v. CITY OF ATLANTA et al

Court:Supreme Court of Georgia

Date published: Sep 26, 1940

Citations

11 S.E.2d 197 (Ga. 1940)
11 S.E.2d 197

Citing Cases

Stephens v. City Council of Augusta

In such case equity will not intervene, either to declare the ordinance void or to enjoin its enforcement.…

Flint v. City Council of Augusta

Whether the ordinance be valid or invalid, the petition did not show such interference or threatened…