Legal Opinion

Caughman, Adm'r v. State Highway Dept.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided January 2, 1930No. 12798PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Stabler.

This is an action for damages for pain and suffering of plaintiff’s intestate, alleged to have resulted from defendant's negligence in the construction and maintenance of a certain State highway at a point near the'town of Bishop-ville.

The complaint alleges that “highway No. 30” extends across the State of South Carolina by way of Bishopville, Sumter, and other towns, and is under the control and supervision of the defendant, the State Highway Department; that this highway, about one mile south of Bishopville, crosses a stream upon…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Hampton & Branchville R. & Lumber Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
  2. State v. ParrisSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1911
  3. Lower Main St. Bk. v. Caledonian Ins. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
  4. Templeton v. C. & W. C. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1921
  5. Crews v. SweetSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1923

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Morrison v. South Carolina State Highway DepartmentSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1936

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API