Bogan v. Sprott
Supreme Court of South Carolina
The court said: “All the exceptions but the fifth, in different forms, complain of alleged insufficiency of the proof. That is a matter of fact, which, in a law case, cannot be reviewed by this court, especially where the trial justice and the Circuit Judge concurred.
Read the full summary
The court said: “All the exceptions but the fifth, in different forms, complain of alleged insufficiency of the proof. That is a matter of fact, which, in a law case, cannot be reviewed by this court, especially where the trial justice and the Circuit Judge concurred. “As to exception 5: 'Because it was error in the presiding judge to order judgment to be entered up in two cases, and for two sets of costs, when the eases were tried together.’ It is true that the amounts involved in these cases were small, but there was no pretence of a joint interest. Each party owned his little account, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice McGowan,
*605These were two separate • actions to recover amounts due on open accounts for labor performed. Judgment was separately rendered by the trial justice in favor of the two plaintiffs, and, on appeal to the Circuit Court, where the two cases were again heard together, judgment was ordered severally to each plaintiff, with costs to each. Defendant appealed.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Kennedy v. Emp. St. Und'rs of Watertown, N.Y.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1943
- Ford v. New York Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1936