Sloan & Son. v. Courtenay
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Klugh, J., York, spring term, 1898. Action on contract by J. B. E. Sloan & Son against Francis J. Pelzer, Wm. A. Courtenay, John R. London, Thomas C. Robertson and Allen Jones.
Read the full summary
Before Klugh, J., York, spring term, 1898. Action on contract by J. B. E. Sloan & Son against Francis J. Pelzer, Wm. A. Courtenay, John R. London, Thomas C. Robertson and Allen Jones. Judgment was only asked against defendant, Courtenay, who filed the following' answer: 1. That he denies that, under the decree mentioned in the second paragraph of the complaint, the plaintiffs had the lien therein alleged. 2. That he did sign for himself and F. J. Pelzer, a written paper, on July 5, 1892, 'but that he did so under the following circumstances: That he, for himself and said Pelzer, agreed,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice McIver.
The plaintiffs bring this action to- recover from the defendants a specified amount claiming to be due under a contract, a part of which is in writing, supplemented by certain parol testimony set out in the “Case.” The written instrument relied on as a part of said contract reads as follows: “Chester, S. G, 5th July, 1892. Re. Mary F. McCrady vs. Allen Jones et al. With the consent and at the request of all the counsel in this cause, I, the undersigned, agree to bid off the lands as follows : (1) The water power tract (544…
2Cited by6 opinions
- J.B. Colt Company v. BrittSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- Haselden v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1949
- Jennings v. McCowanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1949
- Gladden v. KeistlerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1927
- Gladden v. KeistlerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.