Dawkins v. Mathis
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Action by W. I. Dawkins and Hyland P. Stewart, receivers of D. B. Stewart Co., against C. H. Mathis, to recover a subscription to capital stock of the company. The following is the order of Judge Buchanan, upon motion of defendant to dismiss the complaint: ■ This case came on to be heard before me and a jury empanelled at the November, 1895, term.
Read the full summary
Action by W. I. Dawkins and Hyland P. Stewart, receivers of D. B. Stewart Co., against C. H. Mathis, to recover a subscription to capital stock of the company. The following is the order of Judge Buchanan, upon motion of defendant to dismiss the complaint: ■ This case came on to be heard before me and a jury empanelled at the November, 1895, term. The defendant, upon the reading of the plaintiffs’ complaint, interposed an oral motion, called an oral demurrer, to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, in that it…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Gary.
This action was brought for the’ purpose of recovering from the defendant the balance due on subscription to the capital stock of the D. B. Stewart Company. The defendant answered the complaint, and set up the defense of failure of consideration.
The other facts necessary for a proper understanding of this case will be found stated in the order granted by his Honor, Judge Buchanan, which, together with appellant’s exceptions, will be set out in the report of the case. Section 165 of the Code is as follows: “The defendant may demur to…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Kirton v. HowardSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
- Trimmier v. Atlanta & Charlotte Air Line Ry.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1908
- Duke v. Postal Telegraph Cable Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1905
- Atlantic Coast Line R. R. v. EppersonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1910
- Duke v. Postal Telegraph Cable Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1905