Legal Opinion

State v. Workman

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided December 8, 1892No. 3067PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This was a motion which is sufficiently indicated in the following order,

2Per curiam

This is a motion to suspend this appeal, and to remaud the case to the Circuit Court for the purpose of enabling the appellant to move that court for a new trial upon the ground of after discovered evidence. After a careful consideration of the affidavits submitted in support of the motion, we are constrained to say that we do not think such a prima fade showing has been made as would warrant this court in suspending the appeal for the purpose indicated. The evidence claimed to have been subsequently discovered is that…

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. MayfieldSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1959
  2. Bodie v. Char. & West. Car. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1903
  3. Lorick & Lowrance, Inc. v. Julius H. Walker & Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1929
  4. State v. PittmanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
  5. Kean v. LandrumSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1905

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API