High Country Fashions, Inc. v. Marlenna Fashions, Inc., 44309

Citation257 Ga. 267,357 S.E.2d 576
Decision Date08 July 1987
Docket NumberNo. 44309,44309
PartiesHIGH COUNTRY FASHIONS, INC. et al. v. MARLENNA FASHIONS, INC.
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

Daniel I. MacIntyre, IV, Edward H. Saunders, MacIntyre and Weyant, Atlanta, for High Country Fashions, Inc., et al.

Gregory T. Presmanes, James G. Jackson, Hines & Lowendick, P.C., Atlanta, for Marlenna Fashions, Inc.

SMITH, Justice.

The appellee, Marlenna Fashions, Inc., filed a complaint against the appellant, High Country Fashions, Inc., et al., in which, inter alia, it asserted that the appellants committed tortious, unfair, and deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of their business with the intent to harm the appellee. The deceptive acts or practices allegedly included making disparaging statements to prospective customers of the appellee regarding the appellee's business, publishing materials which contained untrue misleading statements and other false information, and giving other false information to prospective customers. The appellee alleged that such practices violated OCGA Sec. 10-1-372(a)(8) and (12), thereby entitling the appellee to an injunction to prevent continuing violations of the provisions of the Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act. An interlocutory injunction was granted in which the appellants were "ordered, restrained and enjoined, jointly and severally, from making or distributing any false or misleading statements, whether orally or in writing, concerning the [appellee] pending final adjudication of all issues in the above-styled action ..." We reverse.

In upholding an injunction to restrain publication of libelous material, this court cited Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Comm. on Human Relations, 413 U.S. 376, 390, 93 S.Ct. 2553, 2561, 37 L.Ed.2d 669 (1973) for the proposition that " 'it has never been held that all injunctions (against publication) are impermissible.' " Retail Credit v. Russell, 234 Ga. 765, 779, 218 S.E.2d 54 (1975). The injunction upheld in that case was entered subsequent to a verdict in which a jury found that statements made by Retail Credit were false and defamatory. Id. at 778, 218 S.E.2d 54.

Two years later, then Justice Marshall, now Chief Justice Marshall writing for the court reversed an interlocutory injunction and stated that "[w]hether viewed as controlled by the rule itself or by the prior exception, the grant of the interlocutory injunction in this case was improper. The appellee has simply failed to show that it would be irreparably harmed by the sign on the appellants'...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Wood v. Wade
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • February 4, 2022
    ...Court has consistently exhibited its firm policy to protect the right of free speech," see, e.g., High Country Fashions v. Marlenna Fashions , 257 Ga. 267, 268, 357 S.E.2d 576 (1987), but noted that "[t]he line of Georgia cases rejecting injunctive relief did not ... arise in the context of......
  • Wood v. Wade
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • February 4, 2022
    ... ... High Country Fashions v. Marlenna Fashions , 257 Ga ... Amendment." Kneebinding, Inc. v. Howell , 208 ... Vt. 578, 605 (I) (B) ... ...
  • Ellerbee v. Mills
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • November 16, 1992
    ...majority opinion belies this court's professed commitment "to protect the right of free speech." High Country Fashions, Inc. v. Marlenna Fashions, Inc., 257 Ga. 267, 268, 357 S.E.2d 576 (1987). The opinion exalts the right of a public school principal to protect his professional reputation ......
  • Davis v. City of Macon
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • July 16, 1992
    ...305 (1982) (speech protected against criminal prosecution unless likely to cause breach of peace); High Country Fashions, Inc. v. Marlenna Fashions, Inc, 257 Ga. 267, 357 S.E.2d 576 (1987) (injunction to restrain one company from making allegedly libelous statements against another company ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT