Wilson v. Township of York
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Watts, J., York, April, 1894. These were four actions by Wilson, Wilson & McDow, continued in the name of W. B. Wilson, jr., and Thos.
Read the full summary
Before Watts, J., York, April, 1894. These were four actions by Wilson, Wilson & McDow, continued in the name of W. B. Wilson, jr., and Thos. F. McDow, after the death of W. B. Wilson, sr., against four townships of York County, to wit: the townships of York, Catawba, Cherokee, and Ebenezer, respectively, commenced September 18, 1883. The order of Judge Watts, settling the “Case,” was as follows: This cause is before me for the purpose of settling “Case” for the purpose of appeal to Supreme Court. The defendants’ attorneys served a “Proposed Case,” to which plaintiffs’ attorneys served…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice McIver.
The four cases above stated, involving the same questions, were heard and will be considered together. It appears that., upon due notice, his honor, Judge Ernest Gary, on the 11th of November, 1893, granted an order, from which there was no'appeal, in the following terms: *301On hearing read the pleadings in the above stated causes, and it appearing from the complaints that the causes of action stated are for unliquidated money demands, and on motion of Finley & Brice and W. B. McCaw, attorneys for defendants, it is ordered, that…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Givens v. North Augusta Electric & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1912
- Newell Contracting Co. v. BlankenshipSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- Sumter Hardwood Co. v. FitchetteSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1925
- Smith v. Union Central L. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1919
- Peeples v. HornikSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1929
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.