Chappell v. McCown

87 S.E. 147, 103 S.C. 6, 1915 S.C. LEXIS 242
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided December 17, 1915·No. 9246·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the Court, en banc, was delivered

Per Curiam.

The petitioner sought in this action to enjoin the holding of the election which was. authorized by act of the legislature (29 Stat. 88) on the question of the prohibition of the manufacture and sale of alcoholic liquors and beverages in this State.

The motion for injunction was heard by the Court en banc last August, and, at that time, an order was filed refusing it, and stating that the reason therefor would be given later.

It is not deemed necessary to discuss the various grounds urged by petitioner why the election should be enjoined, or *10 those urged by respondents why it should not. It is sufficient to say that the Court was and is unanimously of the opinion that the motion should be refused on the ground that petitioner has an adequate remedy at law.

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

Chappell v. McCown, 87 S.E. 147, 103 S.C. 6, 1915 S.C. LEXIS 242 (S.C. 1915).

87 S.E. 147 (Chappell v. McCown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Joytime Distributors & Amusement Co. v. State
528 S.E.2d 647 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1999)
Spriggs v. Clark, SEC. of State
14 P.2d 667 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1932)