Legal Opinion

Fortner v. Carnes

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 29, 1972No. 19428PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bussey, Justice:

In this action the plaintiff recovered a jury verdict for the actual value of an automobile left by the plaintiff with the defendant under a bailment for mutual benefit. The appeal is from an order denying the defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto.

There seems to be no controversy as to most of the key facts and other facts are stated in the light of the settled rule, here applicable, that the evidence and all inferences reasonably deducible therefrom have to be viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Defendant owned and operated Carnes Parts and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Stone v. BetheaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1968
  2. Fleischman, Morris & Co. v. Southern Ry.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1907
  3. Johnston v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1937
  4. Kelley v. Capital Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1944
  5. Arkwright Mills v. Clearwater Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1950

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. M. Bruenger & Co. v. Dodge City Truck Stop, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1984
  2. Mellen v. LaneCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2008
  3. Industrial Welding Supplies, Inc. v. Atlas Vending Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1981
  4. Broadview Leasing Co. v. Cape Central Airways, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1976
  5. Harris v. BurnsideSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1973

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API