Boyd v. Maxwell
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Per curiam
Respondent brought his action for personal and property damage against an individual, Robert Samuel, and appellant, a corporation, for injuries sustained in an automobile accident. There was no connection between the two defendants. The complaint alleges, Paragraph III, omitting specifications of negligence of which there was not a scintilla of supporting evidence:
“That the defendants were jointly and concurrently negligent, careless, reckless, willful and wanton in the following particulars, to wit: * * *
“(b) In the failure of the driver of Maxwell Brothers & Quinn’s truck to signal or give…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Matthews v. Seaboard Air Line RailwaySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1903
- Matthews v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1893
- Pendleton v. Columbia Ry., G. E. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
- Halsey v. Minnesota-South Carolina Land & Timber Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1934
- Rhodes v. Southern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1927
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. GregorySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1939
- Cammer v. Atlantic Coast Line R.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1948
- Richards v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1954
- Richards v. GREAT A. & P. TEA CO.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1954