Busbee v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Wieson, J., Abbeville, October term, 1910. Action- by Georgia H. Busbee and W. H. Busbee against Western Union Telephone Company. Defendant appeals. cite: Where evidence explains delay wilfulness should not be recovered: 84 S. C. 478; 87 S. C. 316. No damage for disappointment or annoyance: 70 S. C. 418; 81 S. C. 238. Telephone company should have notice of close ties between aunt and niece: 81 S. C. 90. No citations.
1DissentJustice Gary
There are two reasons why I cannot concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Woods :
First. Conceding that there was testimony, in the first instance, tending to show a reckless disregard of the plaintiffs’ rights by the defendant, there was, also, testimony satisfactorily explaining the circumstances, from which such fact might have been inferred by the jury. The question of punitive damages was, therefore, erroneously submitted to the jury.
Second. The eighth exception should be sustained. I concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Woods, that the language used by his Honor, the presiding Judge, was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Butler v. Western Union Tel. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1907
- Johnson v. Western Union Tel. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1908
- Herskovitz v. BairdSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1901