Barron v. Thompson

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Barron v. Thompson

97 S.E. 840, 111 S.C. 339, 1919 S.C. LEXIS 15

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedJanuary 18, 1919

Docket10117

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 97 S.E. 840 (Barron v. Thompson) 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

Barron v. Thompson, 97 S.E. 840, 111 S.C. 339, 1919 S.C. LEXIS 15 (S.C. 1919).

Pincite

Opinions

January 18, 1919. The opinion of the Court was delivered by For the reasons therein stated, the judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

MESSRS. JUSTICES HYDRICK, WATTS and FRAMER concur.

MR. JUSTICE GAGE. I dissent from the judgment of the Court. The master found that the plaintiff was guilty of fraud in bringing the action; and the Court did not reverse that finding. The Court found the plaintiff had not right to sue, and should have accepted the tender.

The master reported that "the $270 claimed to have been tendered by the plaintiff and claimed to have been paid into Court was in fact received by me as master as an officer of the Court as a payment of the money into Court." The master further reported that he "voluntarily" paid the money back to the defendant's attorney.

The defendant, therefore, has not failed in the performance of any duty. The plaintiff has abandoned his right, and is not entitled now to set up a lien.

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