Steffens v. Bulwinkle & Co.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Benet, J., Charleston, Action by George W. Steffens & Sons against H. Bulwinkle & Co., on money demand. The following is the intermediate order upon which the appeal is based: This case appears upon Calendar 1 for the March term of this Court, and a motion is made by defendants’ counsel to strike the case from the docket as having been improperly placed thereon.
Read the full summary
Before Benet, J., Charleston, Action by George W. Steffens & Sons against H. Bulwinkle & Co., on money demand. The following is the intermediate order upon which the appeal is based: This case appears upon Calendar 1 for the March term of this Court, and a motion is made by defendants’ counsel to strike the case from the docket as having been improperly placed thereon. The facts are admitted to. be as follows: Summons and complaint were served on the defendants on December 5th, and on sundry dates prior thereto, the last service having been made on December 5th, 1895. The joint and several…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice McIver.
This was an action on a money demand to recover the amount alleged to be due on a note, whereby the defendants promised to pay to the plaintiffs a certain sum of money therein specified. The pleadings were made up and the issues joined on the 20th of December, 1895. On the 4th of January, 1896, the plaintiffs, through their counsel, filed in the office of the clerk of the Court of Common Pleas for Charleston County the summons and complaint in the action, with the following endorsement thereon: “Issue of fact. Place on Calendar…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State, by Peeples, Atty. Gen. v. GibbesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1918
- Fretwell v. PearmanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926