Aiken v. Lancaster Cotton Mills
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Hydrick, J., Lancaster, December, 1908. Two cases tried together: (1) J. B. Aiken against Lancaster Cotton Mills and C. B. Skipper, and (2) Sarah Aiken against same. From order sustaining demurrers to both complaints, both plaintiffs appeal.
Read the full summary
Before Hydrick, J., Lancaster, December, 1908. Two cases tried together: (1) J. B. Aiken against Lancaster Cotton Mills and C. B. Skipper, and (2) Sarah Aiken against same. From order sustaining demurrers to both complaints, both plaintiffs appeal. Oral argument. cite: A defective warrant zvill not sustain an action for malicious prosecution: 57 S. C., 256; 2 McM., 170; 2. Hill, 499; 72 S. C., 189. The allegations zvill not support an action for false imprisonment: 62 S. C., 91. The warrant states no crime: Crim. Code, 336, 337, 339; 57 S. C., 263.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice Jones.
These two actions were brought to recover damages for malicious prosecution, and the appeals come from orders sustaining demurrers to the complaints for insufficiency.
The alleged prosecution was based upon the following charge in the warrant: “That at Lancaster Cotton Mills, in the county and State aforesaid, on December 21, 1905, J. B. Aiken and his wife, Sarah Aiken, are removing their goods on which he has a chattel mortgage to the State of North Carolina.”
The demurrers were properly sustained under the authority of Whaley v.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. RiceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1895
- State v. HaynesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1906
- Whaley v. LawtonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1900
3Cited by2 opinions
- Elletson v. Dixie Home StoresSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1957
- Segusky v. WilliamsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1911