Wheeler v. Smith
Supreme Court of South Carolina
.Before Wharry, County Judge, Richland, September term, 1918. Action by H. F. Wheeler against W. S. Smith. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. submits: The case . was not properly on the docket at the time it zvas called for trial, and the cause should have been stricken from the calendar and the case continued: Code of Civil Procedure 1912, sec. 314; 46 S. C. 502. The costs of a prior action not having been paid, all proceedings should have been suspended:…
Read the full summary
.Before Wharry, County Judge, Richland, September term, 1918. Action by H. F. Wheeler against W. S. Smith. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. submits: The case . was not properly on the docket at the time it zvas called for trial, and the cause should have been stricken from the calendar and the case continued: Code of Civil Procedure 1912, sec. 314; 46 S. C. 502. The costs of a prior action not having been paid, all proceedings should have been suspended: Circuit Court Rule LX; 67 S. C. 463. The Bank of Columbia was the real party in interest, and plaintiff could not maintain the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chirr Justice Gary.
This is an action on a’promissory note. The jury rendered a verdict against the defendant for the sum of $500, and he appealed.
1 The first question presented by the exceptions is whether the case was properly docketed, on the ground that the plain tiff’s attorney -failed to indorse upon the .complaint the nature of the cause of action. The case was placed on the proper calendar. The failure to indorse the nature of the cause of action on the complaint was a mere irregularity, and in no respect prejudicial to the rights of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Faulkner v. LaneSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1923
- Wade, Jr. v. VaughnCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1928