Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

HULSEY et al. v. CEDARTOWN TEXTILES INC.

WYATT, Justice.

1. It is contended by the plaintiff in error that the judgment of the court below was illegal because the defendants were exercising their constitutionally protect rights of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly under the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Georgia of 1945. Such an assignment of error is too indefinite to raise any question for decision by this court.

2. All other questions raised in the instant case are controlled by the rulings made in the case of Williams v. Cedartown Textiles, ante.

Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.

No. 17664. ARGUED NOVEMBER 13, 1951 — DECIDED JANUARY 14, 1952 — REHEARING DENIED JANUARY 29, 1952.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HULSEY v. CEDARTOWN TEXTILES INC
(Jan 14, 1952)