Simmons v. Western Union Tel. Co.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Klugh, J., 'Greenville, July term, 1901. Action by Maud Simmons and F. M. Simmons, her husband, against Western Union Telegraph Co. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. cite: Mental anguish act is unconstitutional: 32 S. C., 592; 57 S. C., 325; Cooley on Con. Uim., 484; 165 U. S., 150; 174 U. S., 96; 113 U. S-, 27; 19 S. W. R., 910. Act cannot come under police power: Tiedeman on Uim. of Pol.
Read the full summary
Before Klugh, J., 'Greenville, July term, 1901. Action by Maud Simmons and F. M. Simmons, her husband, against Western Union Telegraph Co. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. cite: Mental anguish act is unconstitutional: 32 S. C., 592; 57 S. C., 325; Cooley on Con. Uim., 484; 165 U. S., 150; 174 U. S., 96; 113 U. S-, 27; 19 S. W. R., 910. Act cannot come under police power: Tiedeman on Uim. of Pol. Pow., 4, 12, 196, 197, 584; 16 Wall., 62; 38 S. C., 109; 53 S. C., 259; 136 U. S., 313; 165 U. S., 150; 127 U. S., 209; 105 F. R., 31. As to the classification under the act: 19 S. W.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Jones.
This was an action for damages for negligently failing to deliver a telegraphic message. The appeal comes from a judgment for $500 against the defendant.
The first question presented is whether the Court erred in refusing defendant’s motion to strike out certain allegations of the complaint. We, therefore, incorporate herein such allegations of the complaint as will make clear the question presented. It is alleged: “That on the 22d day of March, 1901, F. M. Simmons, the husband of the plaintiff, Maud Simmons, was in Greensboro, N. C.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Den Ex Dem. Murray v. Hoboken Land & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Barbier v. ConnollySupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fé Railway Co. v. EllisSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Soon Hing v. CrowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. HumesSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Ford v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1932
- Crowley Ex Rel. Estate of Crowley v. SpiveyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1985
- Arnold v. City of SpartanburgSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1943
- Gary Concrete Products, Inc. v. RileySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985
- Ware Shoals Mfg. Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1907
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.