Legal Opinion

O'Dowd v. Waters, Mayor

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided December 10, 1924No. 11628PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

I do not concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Cothran: As to the plaintiff’s appeal, I think his Honor was correct in finding and holding that the negotiations between him and the defendants did not amount to a contract and that the plaintiff had no cause of action for specific performance. Wilie v. Price, 5 Rich. Eq,, 91. Harmon v. Tel. Co., 65 S. C., 490; 43 S. E., 959. Holliday v. Pegram, 89 S. C., 73; 71 S. E., 367; Ann. Cas. 1913A, 33.

I think the exceptions of the defendant should be sustained on the ground that the City Council…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Haesloop v. City CouncilSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1923
  2. Holliday v. PegramSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1911
  3. Town of Darlington v. WardSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1897
  4. Thomasson v. Southern RailwaySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1905
  5. Dillingham v. City CouncilSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1907

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Elliott v. McNairSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1967
  2. Holliday v. HigbeeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949
  3. Cimarron Utilities Co. v. City of GuymonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  4. McKinney v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1974
  5. Truesdale v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1943

1 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