Baker v. Irvine
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Ardrich, J., Greenville, November, 1900. Action for damages for conversion of personal property by J. A. and W. C. Baker against W. H. Irvine. From Circuit order reversing judgment of magistrate, the plaintiffs appeal. 1 This appeal was dismissed1 on motion, on April 30, 1901, for failure to file points and authorities three days before peremptory call of case.
Read the full summary
Before Ardrich, J., Greenville, November, 1900. Action for damages for conversion of personal property by J. A. and W. C. Baker against W. H. Irvine. From Circuit order reversing judgment of magistrate, the plaintiffs appeal. 1 This appeal was dismissed1 on motion, on April 30, 1901, for failure to file points and authorities three days before peremptory call of case. Motion properly noticed was heard1 on May 2, to reinstate appeal on the ground that plaintiff’s attorneys were prevented from preparing', printing and filing points and authorities by sickness. Motion granted1 upon condition…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Pope.
On the 2d day of November, 1899, the defendant was served with the following summons:
“State of South Carolina, county of Greenville. By G. W. Nioholls, Esq. To W. H. Irvine, defendant: Complaint having been made unto me by J. A. Baker and W. C. Baker that you are indebted to them in the sum of $100 on account of damages for wrongfully taking from their possession a certain dark horse mule belonging to them jointly, seizure made October 30th, 1899. This is, therefore, to require you to appear before me in my office in Athens, S. C., on…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Nixon & Danforth v. Piedmont Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1906
- Baker v. IrvineSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1902
- Holloway v. HollowaySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1943