Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Wood v. Ross

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided March 18, 1910No. 7510Published

Before DeVorE, J., Cherokee, December, 1909. Action by A. N. Wood against W. H. Ross as Mayor et al. The important part of the decree of Judge Sease is set out in the concurring opinion of Mr. Justice Gary.

Read the full summary

Before DeVorE, J., Cherokee, December, 1909. Action by A. N. Wood against W. H. Ross as Mayor et al. The important part of the decree of Judge Sease is set out in the concurring opinion of Mr. Justice Gary. The decree of Judge DeVore is: “The above entitled cause is an action brought by the plaintiff to enjoin elections by the Town Council of Gaffney, in which elections it is sought to issue $75,000.00 of bonds for water works and $50,000.00 of bonds for a sewerage system; the grounds upon which the injunction is sought are stated fully in the petition or complaint of the plaintiff. Upon the…

1ConcurrenceJustice Gary

Before proceeding to consider the exceptions, it may be well to construe the rulings of their Honors, Judges DeVore and Sease, for the purpose of determining whether the questions raised by the exceptions are merely speculative.

If, under a proper construction of their rulings, the acts, by virtue of which the elections were held, were declared by them to be repugnant to the provisions of the Constitution, requiring, as a condition precedent, to the holding of an election, that there shall be a petition, signed by a majority of the freeholders, then the bonds are illegal, and it would be…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Alston v. LimehouseSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1901
  2. Sease v. DobsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1891
  3. South Carolina & Georgia R. R. v. East Shore Terminal Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1897

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

Powered by the Exa API