Hampton Bros. v. Bogan
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Townsend, J., Spartanburg, December, 1898. Motion to dissolve an attachment in Hampton Bros. v. Matilda Bogan. From order dissolving attachment, plaintiffs appeal. The following is the bond in question: State of South Carolina, County of Spartanburg, Court of Common Pleas.
Read the full summary
Before Townsend, J., Spartanburg, December, 1898. Motion to dissolve an attachment in Hampton Bros. v. Matilda Bogan. From order dissolving attachment, plaintiffs appeal. The following is the bond in question: State of South Carolina, County of Spartanburg, Court of Common Pleas. Know all men by these presents: That in pursuance of the acts of the General Assembly of this State, regulating attachments, we, John W. Hampton, Gray B. Hampton, and B. R. Pollard, are held and firmly bound unto Matilda Bogan in the full and just sum of $250, to be paid unto said Matilda Bogan, her certain…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice McIver.
This is an appeal from an order of his Honor, Judge Townsend, dissolving an attachment issued in the above stated case. The motion to- dissolve was based upon two grounds: 1st, that “the bond is defective because not signed by the plaintiff;” and 2d, on the ground “that the defendant was not a non-resident, and is a resident of this .State.” The motion was granted upon the first ground; and for that reason he deemed it unnecessary to consider or determine the question presented by the second ground. The record before us shows…
2Cited by2 opinions
- McDaniel v. PattersonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1931
- Summerton Live Stock Co. v. EarlySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1918