Gardner v. Jarrett

113 S.E. 493, 121 S.C. 338, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 187
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedSeptember 1, 1922
Docket11010
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 113 S.E. 493 (Gardner v. Jarrett) 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
Gardner v. Jarrett, 113 S.E. 493, 121 S.C. 338, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 187 (S.C. 1922).

Opinions

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chiee Justice Gary.

*343 In order to understand the issues involved, it will be necessary to set out the pleadings in the report of the case.

The first question to be determined is whether there was error on the part of his Honor,- the presiding Judge, in refusing the motion for an order of reference. All the issues were submitted to the jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, against the defendant Noah Lewis alone, for the sum of $99.44, and the plaintiff appealed.

The following authorities show that there was error in refusing the order of reference: Rainwater v. Bank of Cheraw, 108 S. C., 206, 93 S. E., 770; Id., 114 S. C., 353, 103 S. E., 587; Smith v. Union, etc., Ins. Co., 112 S. C., 356, 99 S. E., 830; Parker v. Victoria Real Estate Co., 105 S. C., 375, 89 S. E., 1068..

Having reached this conclusion, the other questions become merely academic.

Reversed.

Mr. Justice Fraser, concurs. Mr. Justice Marion, concurs in result.

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

Related

Farmers & Merchants National Bank v. Foster
129 S.E. 629 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
113 S.E. 493, 121 S.C. 338, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gardner-v-jarrett-sc-1922.