id stringlengths 5 8 | name stringlengths 9 10.6k | name_abbreviation stringlengths 4 160 | decision_date stringlengths 4 10 | docket_number stringlengths 0 169 | first_page stringclasses 829
values | last_page stringclasses 840
values | citations stringlengths 7 25 | volume stringclasses 473
values | reporter stringclasses 7
values | court stringclasses 15
values | jurisdiction stringclasses 1
value | last_updated stringclasses 548
values | provenance stringclasses 3
values | judges stringlengths 0 645 | parties stringlengths 10 10.6k | head_matter stringlengths 14 690k | word_count stringlengths 2 6 | char_count stringlengths 2 6 | text stringlengths 0 200k |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1955590 | DUNCAN v. CLARKE ET AL. | Duncan v. Clarke | 1916-10-09 | 9537 | 17 | 20 | 106 S.C. 17 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | Mr. Justice Fraser, being disqualified, did not participate in the consideration of this case. | DUNCAN v. CLARKE ET AL. | 9537
DUNCAN v. CLARKE ET AL.
(90 S. E. 180.)
1. Trusts—Construction of Trust Deeds.—In interpreting trust deeds, Courts are not bound by the rigid rules controlling in the construction of law deeds.
2. Trusts—Trust Deed—“Issue.”—Where a trust deed read that E. should hold for the life of her husband, “and at his death ... | 1040 | 5633 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Gage.
The appellant’s counsel declares :
“The precise point involved in this appeal is the construction of the word ‘issue.’ The inquiry is whether the word ‘issue’ as used in the * * * deed embraced only the children of Mr. Henry D. Green, or whether it is broad en... |
1955567 | BYRD ET AL. v. O'NEAL ET AL. | Byrd v. O'Neal | 1917-02-10 | 9601 | 346 | 351 | 106 S.C. 346 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | BYRD ET AL. v. O’NEAL ET AL. | 9601
BYRD ET AL. v. O’NEAL ET AL.
(91 S. E. 293.)
1. Reformation of Instruments—Mistake—Sufficiency of Evidence. —In an action by heirs of a grantee against the heirs of a grantor to reform a deed to conform to the intention of the parties, evidence held to show proof of a mutual mistake in omitting the word “heirs” in... | 1795 | 9543 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Fraser.
In 1859, Evander Byrd, Jr., married a daughter of Griffin O’Nails. Mr. Byrd and his wife lived for a time with Mr. O’Nails. In 1860, Mr. O’Nails bought a tract of land near him and sold a part to his son-in-law, Byrd. -Byrd moved on the land, built .houses, ... | |
1955573 | STATE v. GRIFFIN | State v. Griffin | 1917-02-08 | 9581 | 283 | 286 | 106 S.C. 283 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | STATE v. GRIFFIN. | 9581
STATE v. GRIFFIN.
(91 S. E. 318.)
1. Seduction—Corroe oration of Female—-“Corroborate.”—In a prosecution for seduction under promise to marry, testimony of mother, in regard to statements by defendant before and after event to the effect, that he would marry girl, held sufficient to corroborate testimony of girl u... | 1045 | 6050 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr.’ Justice Gage.
The defendant, a young negro boy of 19 years, was convicted of seducing a negro girl of 16 years, by means of deception and promise of marriage. Let the statute which creates the offense be reported.
■ There are two exceptions, to wit: (1) That there was no t... | |
1955575 | STATE v. STEVENS | State v. Stevens | 1917-02-08 | 9576 | 272 | 275 | 106 S.C. 272 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | STATE v. STEVENS. | 9576
STATE v. STEVENS.
(91 S. E. 302.)
1. Criminal Law-—-Instructions—Cure op Error by Other Instructions.—In a prosecution for murder, error in the charge that, to have a right to kill in self-defense, defendant must find himself in a condition of circumstances without such fault on his part as induces him to believe ... | 940 | 5491 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Fraser.
The appellant was convicted of murder, and appeals.
There are seven exceptions, but only three questions argued.
1. “It was error to- charge the jury as follows: ‘In order to have a right to kill in self-defense the defendant must find himself in a condition... | |
1955593 | NORWOOD NAT. BANK v. PIEDMONT PUB. CO. ET AL. | Norwood Nat. Bank v. Piedmont Pub. Co. | 1917-02-28 | 9590 | 472 | 478 | 106 S.C. 472 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | Mr. Justice Gage concurs in result. | NORWOOD NAT. BANK v. PIEDMONT PUB. CO. ET AL. | 9590
NORWOOD NAT. BANK v. PIEDMONT PUB. CO. ET AL.
(91 S. E. 966).
1. Bills and Notes'—'Indorsement Before Delivery — Liability.— Under Negotiable Instruments Act 1914 (28 St. at Large, p. 678), secs. 63, 64, a third person placing his name on the back of a note before delivery is liable as indorser.
2. Bills and Notes... | 2240 | 12131 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Watts.
This was an action by plaintiff against the defendants on a promissory note. After issue joined the cause was tried before Judge Mauldin, and a jury, at the Summer term of Court for Greenville county, 1916. At the trial it was announced that the defendant, Le... |
1955557 | PATRICK v. ENGLISH | Patrick v. English | 1917-02-08 | 9574 | 267 | 270 | 106 S.C. 267 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | PATRICK v. ENGLISH. | 9574
PATRICK v. ENGLISH.
(91 S. E. 295.)
1. Witnesses—Competency—Transactions With Decedent—Statute. —Under Code Civ. Proc., sec. 438, limiting the right of a living party to testify about a transaction between himself and another, since deceased, plaintiff, in an action on a note, was incompetent to testify that an in... | 962 | 5246 | . The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Gage;.
This action is upon a note alleged to have been made to Patrick by Mrs. Fanny C. Wallace, and alleged to have been indorsed by Mobley before it came into the hands of Patrick. Mrs. Wallace is now dead, and so is Mobley, who was her son. But Mobley was sued before his d... | |
1955623 | SKUDOWITZ v. BASHA ET AL. | Skudowitz v. Basha | 1917-03-22 | 9650 | 541 | 544 | 106 S.C. 541 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | SKUDOWITZ v. BASHA ET AL. | 9650
SKUDOWITZ v. BASHA ET AL.
(91 S. E. 868.)
1. Sales—-Actions for Price—Evidence.—In an action on open account for the price of ladies’ dresses sold and delivered, defendants’ evidence that the goods were defective in material and workmanship was admissible under the general denial to disprove plaintiff’s allegation... | 1039 | 6076 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Hydricic.
This is an action on open account for goods (ladies’ dresses) sold and delivered to defendants. Plaintiff alleged that the goods were reasonably worth $290.00, and that defendants were indebted to him in that amount for them. The answer was a general denia... | |
1955526 | IN RE COLEMAN ET AL. IN RE WALLACE ET AL. | In re Coleman | 1917-03-22 | 9649 | 534 | 541 | 106 S.C. 534 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | IN RE COLEMAN ET AL. IN RE WALLACE ET AL. | 9649
IN RE COLEMAN ET AL. IN RE WALLACE ET AL.
(91 S. E. 861.)
1. Executors and Administrators — Employment op Attorneys. — Executors having already employed a large force of legal talent may not, without necessity being shown, employ more attorneys and make their compensation a charge on the estate.
2. Executors and A... | 2547 | 14344 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Watts.
Miss Ann E. Rice died, leaving her last will and testament, to which she had added a codicil. She left as executors thereof William Coleman and F. M. Farr. When an application was made by them for a final settlement and discharge, Wallace and Barron and Mower... | |
1955554 | HARMAN v. SOUTHERN RY. CO. | Harman v. Southern Ry. Co. | 1916-12-23 | 9562 | 209 | 211 | 106 S.C. 209 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | HARMAN v. SOUTHERN RY. CO. | 9562
HARMAN v. SOUTHERN RY. CO.
(90 S. E. 1023.)
1. Carriers—Live Stock—Negligence—Punitive Damages—Carmack Amendment.—Under the Carmack Amendment (Act June 29, 1906, c. 3591,-sec. 7, pars. 11, 12, 34 Stat. 593) to the Interstate Commerce Act (Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104„sec. 20, pars. 11, 12, 24 Stat. 386 [U. S. Comp. St... | 642 | 3724 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. ChiEE Justice Gary.
This is an action for actual and punitive damages, alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff, through the wrongful acts of the defendant, in causing injury to a carload of horses and mules shipped from Paris, Ky., to Lexington, ¡3. C., on the 10th ... | |
1955521 | BAGNAL v. SOUTHERN EXPRESS CO. | Bagnal v. Southern Express Co. | 1917-02-10 | 9614 | 395 | 401 | 106 S.C. 395 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | BAGNAL v. SOUTHERN EXPRESS CO. | 9614
BAGNAL v. SOUTHERN EXPRESS CO.
(91 S. E. 334)
.Appeal and Error—Review—Presumption-—Appeal from Intermediate Court.—In view of Code Civ. Proc., sec. 407, relative to appeals to Circuit Court, which provides that upon hearing the appeal the Court shall give judgment according to the justice of the case, without reg... | 1990 | 11308 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. ChiEE Justice Gary.
This action was commenced in a magistrate’s Court to recover the sum of $1, the alleged value of a box of peaches, shipped from a station in Clarendon county to the plaintiff at Sumter, S. C., and for the penalty of $50, for failure to pay the claim with... | |
1955612 | PARHAM-THOMAS-McSWAIN, INC., v. ATLANTIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY | Parham-Thomas-McSwain, Inc. v. Atlantic Life Insurance | 1916-12-23 | 9563 | 211 | 214 | 106 S.C. 211 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | PARHAM-THOMAS-McSWAIN, INC., v. ATLANTIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. | 9563
PARHAM-THOMAS-McSWAIN, INC., v. ATLANTIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY.
(90 S. E. 1022.)
1. Appeal and Error—Appealable Orders—Refusing Nonsuit.—An order refusing a nonsuit or directing a verdict is not appealable until after final judgment, and no appeal will lie from such order where the jury disagreed.
2. Appeal and E... | 1230 | 6376 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice Gary.
This is an appeal from an order setting aside a directed verdict, on the counterclaim interposed by the defendant; also, from the order refusing the defendant’s motion for the direction of a verdict, as to the plaintiff’s cause of action; The jury failed... | |
1955543 | STATE v. WILEY | State v. Wiley | 1917-02-17 | 9628 | 437 | 441 | 106 S.C. 437 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | STATE v. WILEY. | 9628
STATE v. WILEY.
(91 S. E. 382.)
1. Criminal Law—Appeal—Harmless Error—Instructions.—Where counsel for accused admitted that he failed to detect the errors in the Court’s charge when it was read, but only discovered them after carefully examining the written charge furnished by the stenographer, the errors were har... | 1286 | 7563 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. JusticU Watts.
The defendant, George Wiley, was tried for murder at the February term of Court, 1915, before Judge Smith and a jury, and found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to serve a sentence of eight years at hard labor. Later a motion for a new trial was made befo... | |
1955601 | TUTEN ET AL. v. McALHANEY ET AL. | Tuten v. McAlhaney | 1917-02-09 | 9597 | 328 | 337 | 106 S.C. 328 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | TUTEN ET AL. v. McALHANEY ET AL. | 9597
TUTEN ET AL. v. McALHANEY ET AL.
(91 S. E. 328.)
1. Deeds—Execution—Undue Influence—Burden of Proof.—Where the condition of a grantor is such that the borderland between his weak-mindedness and his imbecility is a mere shadow, and a conveyance of valuable property is made by such grantor to a stranger in blood wit... | 3096 | 17125 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Fraser.
“This is an action brought by the heirs at law of William M. Tuten, deceased, to set aside a deed made by him to H. F. McAlhaney on August 14, 191.4, on the grounds of incapacity of the grantor, fraud and misrepresentation on the part of the grantee and want... | |
1955622 | STATE v. HAMPTON | State v. Hampton | 1917-02-08 | 9577 | 275 | 278 | 106 S.C. 275 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | STATE v. HAMPTON. | 9577
STATE v. HAMPTON.
(91 S. E. 315.)
1. Intoxicating Liuuors— Sale — Natural Right.—In view of the statutory declaration that all alcoholic liquors are detrimental and their use against the morals, good health, and safety of the State, no man has a natural right to sell intoxicating liquors, and it is not error for t... | 1179 | 6389 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Fraser.
The appellant was charged with the sale of liquor, keeping a place where liquor was sold, keeping a place where people were allowed to resort for the purpose of drinking liquor, storing liquor and transporting liquor. He was tried and convicted. The verdict ... | |
1955604 | GLOVER v. HEYWARD | Glover v. Heyward | 1917-02-10 | 9604 | 360 | 361 | 106 S.C. 360 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | GLOVER v. HEYWARD. | 9604
GLOVER v. HEYWARD.
(91 S. E. 316.)
Appeal and Error—Orders Appealabie—Discretion of Trial Court— Statute.—Under Code Civ. Proc. 1902, sec. 368, providing that if defendant fails, to appear before the magistrate, and if it is shown by the affidavits served by appellant, or otherwise, that manifest injustice has bee... | 630 | 3527 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Fraser.
This was a proceeding in a magistrate’s Court, to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. Judgment was given against appellant by default. From'this judgment appellant appealed to the Circuit Court. The case was heard by his Honor, Judge Mendel L. Smith, who made the f... | |
1955595 | WHITE ET AL. v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO. | White v. Atlantic Coast Line R. | 1917-02-09 | 9598 | 337 | 339 | 106 S.C. 337 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | WHITE ET AL. v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO. | 9598
WHITE ET AL. v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO.
(91 S. E. 323.)
Railroads—Injuries at Crossing—Jury Case.—In an action against a railroad for killing two horses and injuring a buggy and a gun in a crossing collision, case held for the jury under the evidence.
Before Memminger, J., Monck’s Corner, March, 1916.
Affirmed.... | 606 | 3318 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Gage.
Tort, for the negligent injury to personal property. Defense, the injury resulted from the plaintiffs’ contributory negligence. The thing hurt was a buggy and two horses attached; the horses were killed, and the buggy and a gun were demolished. The instrumenta... | |
1955541 | CONTINENTAL INS. CO. ET AL. v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RY. | Continental Ins. v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. | 1916-09-05 | 9497 | 43 | 45 | 106 S.C. 43 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | CONTINENTAL INS. CO. ET AL. v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RY. | 9497
CONTINENTAL INS. CO. ET AL. v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RY.
(90 S. E. 318.)
• Judgment—Conclusiveness—Persons Concluded.—A judgment in an action by a property owner, in which some of the companies insuring the property were out of the case by nonsuit and one out by the unlawful omission of the jury at the time the verdic... | 506 | 2809 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Gage.
This trial is a sequel to that reported in 102 S. C. 348, 86 S. E. 678. We are of the opinion that the Circuit Court ought to have heard testimony upon the issue of what caused the fire. It is true that, as betwixt the Farmers Mercantile Company and the railro... | |
1955569 | HOLDER v. MELVIN ET AL. | Holder v. Melvin | 1917-01-06 | 9572 | 245 | 255 | 106 S.C. 245 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | HOLDER v. MELVIN ET AL. | 9572
HOLDER v. MELVIN ET AL.
(91 S. E. 97.)
1. Trusts — Deeds — Construction — Rule.—The legal interest of the trustee in an estate given to him in trust is measured, not by words of inheritance in the deed or will, but by the object and extent of the trust upon which the estate is given, whether it be greater or less ... | 3732 | 19960 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice Gary.
This is an action for specific performance, and involves the construction of a deed dated the 4th oí May, 1871, the provisions of which are as follows:
“Know all men by these presents that I, William H. Mays, * '* * for and in consideration of the sum of... | |
1955551 | STATE v. PERRY ET AL. | State v. Perry | 1917-02-08 | 9583 | 289 | 292 | 106 S.C. 289 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | Mr. Chiee Justice Gary and Messrs. Justices Fraser and Gage concur in the opinion of the Court. Mr. Justice Hydrick did not participate in the consideration of this case. | STATE v. PERRY ET AL. | 9583
STATE v. PERRY ET AL.
(91 S. E. 300.)
1. Criminal I,aw—Admissions or Confessions—Testimony at Coroner's Inquest.—'Testimony of one when examined before a coroner’s jury cannot be used against him on a subsequent prosecution for the homicide, as this would be to require him to furnish testimony against himself; any... | 858 | 5023 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Watts.
The defendant was indicted and convicted of murder with a recommendation to mercy before his Honor, Judge Mauldin, and a jury, at the November term of Court, 1915. After sentence, the defendant appeals, and by 18 exceptions imputes error on the part of his Ho... |
1955519 | GLADDEN ET AL. v. CHAPMAN ET AL. | Gladden v. Chapman | 1917-03-09 | 9634 | 486 | 495 | 106 S.C. 486 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | Mr. Justice Watts did not participate in the consideration of this case. | GLADDEN ET AL. v. CHAPMAN ET AL. | 9634
GLADDEN ET AL. v. CHAPMAN ET AL.
(91 S. E. 796.)
1. Judgment—Coixatebal Attack-—-Statute.—In view of Code Civ. Proc. 1912, sec. 185, as to purchasers in good faith under judgments, judgment in a partition suit, and sale made thereunder, must be sustained against collateral attack in am action to recover possession... | 3244 | 18325 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr, Justice Hydrick.
This is an action to' recover possession of a tract of land, which plaintiffs claim as heirs of James H. Kessiah. Defendants claim as purchasers under a judgment of the Circuit Court under which the land was sold for partition amongst the heirs of James H. ... |
1955524 | BANK OF WILLISTON v. ALDERMAN ET AL. | Bank of Williston v. Alderman | 1917-02-10 | 9612 | 386 | 392 | 106 S.C. 386 | 106 | South Carolina Reports | Supreme Court of South Carolina | South Carolina | 2021-08-10T16:58:35.501316+00:00 | CAP | BANK OF WILLISTON v. ALDERMAN ET AL. | 9612
BANK OF WILLISTON v. ALDERMAN ET AL.
(91 S. E. 296.)
1. Jury—Right to Trial by Jury—Action for Recovery of Money Only.—Where plaintiff bank mistook certifi.cate number of a $15 draft for the amount and paid defendant $528.20, and, upon his refusal to surrender surplus, brought suit, alleging mistake and fraud and ... | 2034 | 11464 | The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. ChiER Justice Gary.
This is an appeal from an order of reference, on the ground that the appellant was entitled to a trial by jury.
The second paragraph of the complaint is as follows:
“That on the 24th day of July, 1915, the defendant, Owen Alderman, presented to the plain... |
End of preview. Expand in Data Studio
No dataset card yet
- Downloads last month
- 13