Mayfield v. Bessinger
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Aldrich, J., Bamberg, June, 1910. Action by L. K. Mayfield against A. R. Bessinger and S. G. Ray. Prom order of temporary injunction, defendants appeal. cites: Consent to order cannot be presumed: 25 S. C., 72. There being an adequate remedy at law, court of equity has no jurisdiction: 34 S'. C. 459; 16 Cyc. 33: 9 Rich. Eq. 251; Bail Eq. 187; 1 S. C. 190; 60 S. C. 120; 44 S. C. 281.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Gary.
The plaintiff and the defendant entered into a contract, under which the defendant cultivated the lands of the plaintiff, during the year 1909, for a share of the crops. They failed to agree as to a proper division of the crops, whereupon the defendant proceeded to have the division made by a magistrate, under the provisions of section 2716 of the Code of Law's, which is as follows:
“Whenever labor is performed under contract on shares of crop or crops, such crop or crops shall be gathered and divided off, before it is removed from the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Holliday v. Poston & SonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1901
- Green v. McCarterSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1902
- Devereux v. McCradySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1897
3Cited by4 opinions
- Malcolm Mercantile Co. v. BrittSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1915
- Driggers v. CannonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1917
- Taylor v. ThompsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1948
- Miller v. Eagle Star & British Dominions InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1928