State v. Williams
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Aldrich, J., Laurens, September, 1889. This was an indictment against Jule Williams for violation of contract. The opinion states the case. contended that the statute, under which the defendant was prosecuted, was in violation of article I., sections 1, 2,12, and 20, of the State Constitution, and cited 1 Bl.
Read the full summary
Before Aldrich, J., Laurens, September, 1889. This was an indictment against Jule Williams for violation of contract. The opinion states the case. contended that the statute, under which the defendant was prosecuted, was in violation of article I., sections 1, 2,12, and 20, of the State Constitution, and cited 1 Bl. Com., 186; Utsey v. Hiott, 30 S. C., 360. They further contended that in requiring twenty-six work days every month, the contract exacted Sunday work in February, June, and September, in violation of section 1631 of the General Statutes; and that the failure of the contract to fix…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice McIver.
The defendant was indicted under section 2084 of the General Statutes, for the violation of a written contract to serve the prosecutor as a laborer for the year 1889. The indictment, a copy of which is in the “Case,” does not set out the contract alleged to have been violated ; but the allegation simply is that the defendant “wilfully, unlawfully, and maliciously did violate a certain written contract entered into on the twenty-fourth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight, between the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- People v. . FlackNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Ex Parte HollmanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1908
- Xepapas v. RichardsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1929
- State v. GiantvalleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- State v. MurraySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1906
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.