Beckley v. Howard

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Beckley v. Howard

4 S.C.L. 94

Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided November 15, 1806·Published

Opinion

Waties, J.,

delivered the opinion of all the judges, except Bay, '^absent, sick. No proof of conversion. Drake, when the demand was-made' by Clarke, had not assigned the bond, nor given Clarke any authority to demand it. Plaintiff not entitled to recover. The ‘ penalty of the bond not appearing, there was no other standard whereby to estimate the damage than the land to be conveyed, if a conversion had been proved.

New trial granted.

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

Waties, J.,

delivered the opinion of all the judges, except Bay, '^absent, sick. No proof of conversion. Drake, when the demand was-made' by Clarke, had not assigned the bond, nor given Clarke any authority to demand it. Plaintiff not entitled to recover. The ‘ penalty of the bond not appearing, there was no other standard whereby to estimate the damage than the land to be conveyed, if a conversion had been proved.

New trial granted.

Beckley v. Howard, 4 S.C.L. 94 (S.C. 1806).

Pincite

4 S.C.L. 94 (Beckley v. Howard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.