Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Kimbrell v. Taylor

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided June 29, 1926No. 12017Published

1Concurrence

Mr. Acting Associate Justice °Purdy:

I concur in the result for the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Blease. Besides, if there was not a warranty, there was a failure of consideration, and in such a sum that it is not reasonable to infer that the purchaser would have stood this loss, and especially so in view of the prorating of similar items which were known to seller and buyer.

Mr. Justice Cothran :

I do 'not concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Blease in this case, being of opinion that the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict should have been granted, for the reasons which I…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Iler v. JenningsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1910
  2. Iler v. JenningsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API