Cunningham v. Clarendon Co.

62 S.E. 212, 81 S.C. 201, 1908 S.C. LEXIS 245
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedSeptember 1, 1908
Docket6998
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 62 S.E. 212 (Cunningham v. Clarendon Co.) 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
Cunningham v. Clarendon Co., 62 S.E. 212, 81 S.C. 201, 1908 S.C. LEXIS 245 (S.C. 1908).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Woods.

The claim! of the plaintiff against the County of Clarendon for four thousand nine hundred thirty-two feet of heart lumber at $20 per M, $98.64, was considered by the county board of commissioners on 6th July, 1908, and allowed at the price of only $12 per M, for the lumber, $59.18. The plaintiff appealed, and the Circuit Court 'held the whole amount claimed should have been allowed, and so adjudged.

We are unable to see any ground upon which the judgment can be assailed. The county board of commissioners in passing upon the claims was not only acting in a judicial capacity, but it had exclusive original jurisdiction of the matter; and the only method by which the plaintiff could bring this judgment under review was by appeal to the Circuit Court. Jennings v. Abbeville Co., 24 S. C., 543.

The county board of commissioners might have required the plaintiff to have his witnesses appear in person to testify, but on the hearing before them' the plaintiff was allowed, without objection, to introduce in evidence affidavits in support of his claim, and it was too late to object to such evidence on appeal.

The objection that the Circuit Court could not hear the appeal without a formal return from the county board of commissioners, as required by statute, can not avail the appellant, because the minutes of the county board of commissioners were taken as the return by the Circuit Court without objection on behalf of the county.

It is equally clear the Circuit Judge could not consider affidavits on behalf of the county, which were not before the county board of commissioners when the claim was adjudicated by the board. Moses v. Sumter Co., 55 S. C., 502, 33 S. E., 581.

The judgment of this Court is that the judgment of the Circuit Court be affirmed.

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

Related

Best v. Barnwell County
103 S.E. 479 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1920)
People's Bank v. Greenville County
67 S.E. 296 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
62 S.E. 212, 81 S.C. 201, 1908 S.C. LEXIS 245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cunningham-v-clarendon-co-sc-1908.