Bank of Charleston v. F.M. Young Company

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Bank of Charleston v. F.M. Young Company

123 S.E. 793, 129 S.C. 82, 1924 S.C. LEXIS 26

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedJuly 18, 1924

Docket11554

StatusPublished

This text of 123 S.E. 793 (Bank of Charleston v. F.M. Young Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bank of Charleston v. F.M. Young Company, 123 S.E. 793, 129 S.C. 82, 1924 S.C. LEXIS 26 (S.C. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This case was submitted upon printed “case” and argument of counsel for appellant, the counsel for the respondent filing with the Clerk of this Court the following stipulation :

“The above-named respondent is in bankruptcy, and, as the trade acceptance sued upon in the within cause was listed as a liability, I shall not press the respondent’s rights in this appeal before the Court on the 14th inst. Please make the statement for me, stating that I will not resist any such order as the appellant’s counsel may see1 fit to take.”

It is accordingly ordered that the judgment of the Circuit Court be reversed.

Messrs. Justices Watts, Eraser, Cothran and Marion concur. Mr. Chiee Justice Gary did not participate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

This case was submitted upon printed “case” and argument of counsel for appellant, the counsel for the respondent filing with the Clerk of this Court the following stipulation :

“The above-named respondent is in bankruptcy, and, as the trade acceptance sued upon in the within cause was listed as a liability, I shall not press the respondent’s rights in this appeal before the Court on the 14th inst. Please make the statement for me, stating that I will not resist any such order as the appellant’s counsel may see1 fit to take.”

It is accordingly ordered that the judgment of the Circuit Court be reversed.

Messrs. Justices Watts, Eraser, Cothran and Marion concur. Mr. Chiee Justice Gary did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 S.E. 793, 129 S.C. 82, 1924 S.C. LEXIS 26, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-charleston-v-fm-young-company-sc-1924.