Legal Opinion

Fuller v. McLeod

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided April 23, 1912No. 8190PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Before DrVorr, J., Sumter, March, 1911. Action by H. B. Tuller against C. L. McLeod. Plaintiff appeals. cites: As to construction of conditions: 89 S. C. 81; 7 Cyc. 10-1; 85 S. C. 196. Attorney’s fees, loss of time, expenses, etc., should not be considered in azvarding actual damages: 39 S. C. 465; 31 S. C. 49; 12 Rich. 292; 3 Strob. 373; 40 S. C. 528; 51 S. €. 484; 65 S. C. 506. cite: As to construction of condition as to removal: 4 Cyc. 437; 43 S. C. 203; 74 S. •C. 453.…

Read the full summary

Before DrVorr, J., Sumter, March, 1911. Action by H. B. Tuller against C. L. McLeod. Plaintiff appeals. cites: As to construction of conditions: 89 S. C. 81; 7 Cyc. 10-1; 85 S. C. 196. Attorney’s fees, loss of time, expenses, etc., should not be considered in azvarding actual damages: 39 S. C. 465; 31 S. C. 49; 12 Rich. 292; 3 Strob. 373; 40 S. C. 528; 51 S. €. 484; 65 S. C. 506. cite: As to construction of condition as to removal: 4 Cyc. 437; 43 S. C. 203; 74 S. •C. 453. Answer sets out special damages: 65 S. C. 506 ; 31 S. C. 52. Nominal damages may be recovered without proof of actual: 34…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Woods.

The defendant, on March 29, 1910, purchased from the plaintiff two mules, and for $360.18 of the purchase money gave him a note secured by a mortgage of the mules. The mortgage contained the following stipulation: “And provided further, that said mortgagor shall retain possession of said goods and chattels until default be made in the payment of said note, but if the same is not paid when due, or if before the said note is due, the said mortgagor shall attempt to make way with or remove said goods and chattels, or any part thereof,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Edgefield Mfg. Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1907
  2. Sonneborn v. Southern RailwaySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1903
  3. Marshall, Springs & Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1900

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Bank of Norris v. Pates & Allen Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1918

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

Powered by the Exa API