Carolina National Bank v. Spigner

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Carolina National Bank v. Spigner

90 S.E. 748, 106 S.C. 185, 1916 S.C. LEXIS 285

Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided October 14, 1916·No. 9546·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The Circuit Judges having been called to the assistance of the Supreme Court,

*192 October 14, 1916.

The opinion of the Court en banc was delivered by

Mr. Chief Justice Gary.

For the reasons stated by his Honor,, the Circuit Judge, and upon the authority of Bank v. Neil, 106 S. C. 173, 90 S. E. 744, in which the opinion has just been filed, the judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Messrs. Justices Hydrick, Gage and Fraser, and Circuit Judges Prince, Memminger, Bowman, Shipp, SeasE, Gary, Wilson, Smith and Peurifoy, concur in the opinion of the Court. Mr. Justice Watts was disqualified and did not sit in this case.

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

The Circuit Judges having been called to the assistance of the Supreme Court,

*192 October 14, 1916.

The opinion of the Court en banc was delivered by

Mr. Chief Justice Gary.

For the reasons stated by his Honor,, the Circuit Judge, and upon the authority of Bank v. Neil, 106 S. C. 173, 90 S. E. 744, in which the opinion has just been filed, the judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Messrs. Justices Hydrick, Gage and Fraser, and Circuit Judges Prince, Memminger, Bowman, Shipp, SeasE, Gary, Wilson, Smith and Peurifoy, concur in the opinion of the Court. Mr. Justice Watts was disqualified and did not sit in this case.

Carolina National Bank v. Spigner, 90 S.E. 748, 106 S.C. 185, 1916 S.C. LEXIS 285 (S.C. 1916).

Pincite

90 S.E. 748 (Carolina National Bank v. Spigner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related