Legal Opinion

Gibbes v. Greenville & Columbia Railroad

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided August 8, 1882PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Before. Fraser, J., Richland, December, 1881. Petition by E. B. Benson & Co. in re Gibbes v. Greenville and Columbia Railroad Company, and the State, ex relatione the Attorney-General, v. same. The petition was based upon a contract made by letter, and which is fully stated in the opinion.

Read the full summary

Before. Fraser, J., Richland, December, 1881. Petition by E. B. Benson & Co. in re Gibbes v. Greenville and Columbia Railroad Company, and the State, ex relatione the Attorney-General, v. same. The petition was based upon a contract made by letter, and which is fully stated in the opinion. The Circuit' decree, after a statement of the facts repeated in the opinion, was as follows : Under orders, in such cases, receivers are sometimes allowed to do certain specific acts; but, in .this case, there is no limit, except, as I construe the order, that which is furnished by a wise discretion,…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Mu. Chief Justice Simpson.

The appellants, Benson A Co., filed a petition in the court below in re the above stated causes, praying payment of a certain claim for $668 as rebato freight on six hundred aud sixty-eight bales of cotton shipped over the Greenville and Columbia railroad by the petitioners, from Anderson Court House, during the cotton season of 1877 — 78. This claim was founded upon an alleged contract between the petitioners and the president and directors of said railroad company acting as receivers under the order of June 18th, 1872, known…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Johnson v. Pensacola & Perdido RailroadSupreme Court of Florida · 1878

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Interstate Com. Commiss. v. B. & O. RAILROADSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. Kerwin v. HummelCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API