City of Columbia v. Spigner

Supreme Court of South Carolina

City of Columbia v. Spigner

68 S.E. 134, 86 S.C. 62, 1910 S.C. LEXIS 21

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedMay 11, 1910

Docket7575

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 68 S.E. 134 (City of Columbia v. Spigner) 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

City of Columbia v. Spigner, 68 S.E. 134, 86 S.C. 62, 1910 S.C. LEXIS 21 (S.C. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this proceeding for mandamus the Circuit Judge in his decree ordering the mandamus to issue, said “it was admitted on both sides at the hearing that the pleadings herein raised no issue of fact,” and the case was decided by the Circuit Court and heard in this Court on the pleadings without the taking of evidence. One of the.exceptions of the defendant is directed to this finding of the Circuit Court. This Court heard the cause and has filed a decree reversing the judgment of the Circuit Court, and a petition has been filed for a rehearing. Upon a careful reconsideration and review of the entire case, we have reached the conclusion that the pleadings raise important issues of fact and that the cause cannot 'be justly decided until there has been a finding of the facts after hearing evidence.

It is therefore adjudged that the decree of this Court be withdrawn from the files, and that this order be substituted therefor, that the judgment of the Circuit Court ’be reversed and the cause be remanded to that Court for a new trial on the evidence to be taken in such manner as the Circuit Court may direct. •

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

Per Curiam.

In this proceeding for mandamus the Circuit Judge in his decree ordering the mandamus to issue, said “it was admitted on both sides at the hearing that the pleadings herein raised no issue of fact,” and the case was decided by the Circuit Court and heard in this Court on the pleadings without the taking of evidence. One of the.exceptions of the defendant is directed to this finding of the Circuit Court. This Court heard the cause and has filed a decree reversing the judgment of the Circuit Court, and a petition has been filed for a rehearing. Upon a careful reconsideration and review of the entire case, we have reached the conclusion that the pleadings raise important issues of fact and that the cause cannot 'be justly decided until there has been a finding of the facts after hearing evidence.

It is therefore adjudged that the decree of this Court be withdrawn from the files, and that this order be substituted therefor, that the judgment of the Circuit Court ’be reversed and the cause be remanded to that Court for a new trial on the evidence to be taken in such manner as the Circuit Court may direct. •

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 S.E. 134, 86 S.C. 62, 1910 S.C. LEXIS 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-columbia-v-spigner-sc-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack