Germofert Fertilizer Co. v. Scruggs

81 S.E. 667, 97 S.C. 396, 1914 S.C. LEXIS 188
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided May 6, 1914·No. 8846·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chief Justice Gary.

*397 ■ The facts in this case are similar to those in the case of Germofert Mfg. Co. v. S. F. Castles, 81 S. E. 665, in which the opinion has just been filed. In that case, the motion to strike out certain allegations in the defenses set up in the answer was made upon .the ground that said allegations were sham and irrelevant, while the motion in the present case was based upon the ground that similar allegations were irrelevant and redundant.

There is no. difference in principle between the two cases.

Order reversed.

Mr. Justice Gage did not sit in this case.

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

Germofert Fertilizer Co. v. Scruggs, 81 S.E. 667, 97 S.C. 396, 1914 S.C. LEXIS 188 (S.C. 1914).

81 S.E. 667 (Germofert Fertilizer Co. v. Scruggs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Richmond Guano Co. v. Kirkpatrick
98 S.E. 327 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1919)