Stanton v. Interstate Chemical Corp.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before DeVore, J., Action by Albert Stanton, by his guardian ad litem, against the Interstate Chemical Corporation and Felix H. Chisolm. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion. NUnassignable duties of master: 72 S. C. 264, 269; 39 S. C. 507; 26 Fed. 837; 66 S. C. 91, 99; 154 U. S. 349; 40 S. C. 104, 106, 107; 63 Fed. 107; 109 U. S. 483; 114-Fed. 100, note; 54 b. R. A. 106; 198 Pa. 112; 52 b.
Read the full summary
Before DeVore, J., Action by Albert Stanton, by his guardian ad litem, against the Interstate Chemical Corporation and Felix H. Chisolm. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion. NUnassignable duties of master: 72 S. C. 264, 269; 39 S. C. 507; 26 Fed. 837; 66 S. C. 91, 99; 154 U. S. 349; 40 S. C. 104, 106, 107; 63 Fed. 107; 109 U. S. 483; 114-Fed. 100, note; 54 b. R. A. 106; 198 Pa. 112; 52 b. R. A. 935. Fellow servants: 78 S. C. 381; 25 S. C. 133; 63 S. C. 559, 576; 112 U. S. 377; 149 U. S. 375.; 165 U. S. 363; 50 Fed. 728; 154 U. S. 358; 50 Fed.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinión of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Watts.
This was an action for $10,000 for personal injuries brought by the plaintiff, an infant under 21 years. The cause was tried before Judge DeVore, and a jury, at the April term of the Court, 1913, for Charleston county, and resulted in a verdict in favor of the plaintiff against both defendants. At the close of plaintiff’s evidence a motion was made by the defendants for a nonsuit as to punitive damages on the ground that there was no evidence tending to show wilfulness and wantonness, or recklessness, or either of them, and as to' the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hicks v. Southern Ry.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1902
- Brabham v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1905
- Trimmier v. Atlanta & Charlotte Air Line Ry.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1908
- Branch v. Port Royal &c. Railway Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1892
- Martin v. Royster Guano Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1905
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Grainger v. Greenville, S. & A. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1915
- Chitwood v. ChitwoodSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1930
- McAlister, Admx. v. Southern Rwy. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- Leopard v. Beaver Duck MillsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1921
- Maddox v. Steel Heddle Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1929