Ex Parte Wallace & Barron

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Ex Parte Wallace & Barron

120 S.E. 756, 127 S.C. 60, 1924 S.C. LEXIS 119

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedJanuary 3, 1924

Docket11389

StatusPublished

This text of 120 S.E. 756 (Ex Parte Wallace & Barron) 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

Ex Parte Wallace & Barron, 120 S.E. 756, 127 S.C. 60, 1924 S.C. LEXIS 119 (S.C. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Cothran.

Appeal from an order of the Circuit Court refusing to set aside the taxation of costs by the Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas against the appellants, Wallace & Barron, and the estate of George S. Mower, deceased. The history of the litigation is set forth in the order of the Circuit Judge. Eet it be reported. The conclusions of the Circuit Judge are entirely satisfactory. The remittitur from this Court went to the Circuit Court, where orders in conformity with the judgment should have been and doubtless were taken. *64 It was entirely proper, therefore,, for the Clerk of that Court to tax the appeal costs.

The judgment of this Court is .that the order appealed from be affirmed.

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

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Cothran.

Appeal from an order of the Circuit Court refusing to set aside the taxation of costs by the Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas against the appellants, Wallace & Barron, and the estate of George S. Mower, deceased. The history of the litigation is set forth in the order of the Circuit Judge. Eet it be reported. The conclusions of the Circuit Judge are entirely satisfactory. The remittitur from this Court went to the Circuit Court, where orders in conformity with the judgment should have been and doubtless were taken. *64 It was entirely proper, therefore,, for the Clerk of that Court to tax the appeal costs.

The judgment of this Court is .that the order appealed from be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

120 S.E. 756, 127 S.C. 60, 1924 S.C. LEXIS 119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-wallace-barron-sc-1924.