State v. Pacific Guano Co.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
The appeal was from the following order: “On motion of counsel for the State of South Carolina, plaintiff herein, after due notice to the counsel for the defendants, it is “Ordered, that the remittitur of the Supreme Court in the above entitled cause be filed in this court, and that the judgment and decree of the Supreme Court be made the judgment and decree of this court.
Read the full summary
The appeal was from the following order: “On motion of counsel for the State of South Carolina, plaintiff herein, after due notice to the counsel for the defendants, it is “Ordered, that the remittitur of the Supreme Court in the above entitled cause be filed in this court, and that the judgment and decree of the Supreme Court be made the judgment and decree of this court. “Ordered further, that the judgment rendered herein by his honor, Judge Cothran, in this court, and filed 29th July, 1886, be, and the same is hereby, reversed and set aside, and that a new trial be had under the order of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court ivas delivered by
Mr. Justice McIver.
The only question raised by the present appeal, which is the third one taken in the case, is as to the mode of trial, and hence it is only necessary to state so much of the proceedings as is necessary to a proper understanding of that question.
The first order upon this subject was granted by Judge Aldrich on October 30, 1882, whereby it was referred to a referee “to take the testimony in this ease, together with an account of all phosphate rock and phosphatic deposits dug, mined, or removed by defendants from the several creeks…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Newell Contracting Co. v. BlankenshipSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- Ex Parte City of Anderson v. Brown BrosSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1909