Legal Opinion

Adams v. Hardin Motor Co.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided February 24, 1919No. 10168PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Before Whaeey, County Judge, Richland, - term. 1918. Action by Jess Adams and another against the Harditi Motor Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant .appeals. Mr. Graydon submits : The motion for a nonsuit as to special damages ought to have been granted.

Read the full summary

Before Whaeey, County Judge, Richland, - term. 1918. Action by Jess Adams and another against the Harditi Motor Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant .appeals. Mr. Graydon submits : The motion for a nonsuit as to special damages ought to have been granted. In order to recover special damages for the breach of a contract, it is necessary to allege and prove that the defendant had notice, at the time of making the contract, of the special circumstances from which the damages might reasonably, be expected to result: 83 S. C. 501; 89 S. C. 483. Loss of prospective profits cannot be…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Fraser.

There is evidence in the record that one Lula Niles owned an automobile and left it with the defendant, in October, 1917 ;that the defendant agreed to do the work within a week or ten days; that a few days thereafter the plaintiffs bought the automobile and went to see the defendant, and notified it that he had bought the car, and that the defendant’s agent renewed the promise to do the work within the ten days; that the defendant was notified that the automobile was to be used in the transfer business in the city of Columbia; that…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. COLLINS MUSIC COMPANY, INC. v. IngramCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API