Legal Opinion

S. M. Ward & Co. v. Ford

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided September 13, 1900PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Before Krugh, J., Georgetown, Action for damages by S. M. Ward & Co. against Frederick W. Ford. From order dismissing demurrer, defendant appeals. cite: A demurrer only admits well pleaded issuable facts: 99 U. S., 35 ; 73 N. W. R., 57; 74 N. W. R., 354; 45 N. E. R., 622; 101 N. Y., 329; 47 S. C., 184; 54 S. C., 578. Requisite statement in a complaint: 18 S. C., 471; 35 S. C., 309. Conclusions constitute no part of cause of action: 28 S. C., 396; 33 S. C., 217; 34 S. C., 67;…

Read the full summary

Before Krugh, J., Georgetown, Action for damages by S. M. Ward & Co. against Frederick W. Ford. From order dismissing demurrer, defendant appeals. cite: A demurrer only admits well pleaded issuable facts: 99 U. S., 35 ; 73 N. W. R., 57; 74 N. W. R., 354; 45 N. E. R., 622; 101 N. Y., 329; 47 S. C., 184; 54 S. C., 578. Requisite statement in a complaint: 18 S. C., 471; 35 S. C., 309. Conclusions constitute no part of cause of action: 28 S. C., 396; 33 S. C., 217; 34 S. C., 67; 45' S. C., 392; 73 N. E. R:, 56; 45 N. E. R., 622; 107 U. S., 591; 115 U. S.,'237. So expressions and allegations of…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Jones.

The Circuit Court overruled defendant’s demurrer to the complaint on the ground that it failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and the defendant now seeks to reverse said order. The complaint attempted to state two causes of action, each of which was demurred to;, but it will 'be sufficient for this appeal to state the allegations as to one of said causes, which are substantially as follws: 1. That plaintiffs were partners in carrying on the business of rice planting, in Georgetown County. 2. That as such…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Vandalia Railroad v. YeagerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1915
  2. McDaniel v. Greenville-Carolina Power Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1913
  3. Spigener v. Provident Life, Etc., Ins. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1928
  4. Southern Railway Co. v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1930
  5. Strickland v. ChaplinSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API