Griffin v. Thayer

98 S.E. 201, 111 S.C. 456, 1919 S.C. LEXIS 46
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedFebruary 5, 1919
Docket10155
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 98 S.E. 201 (Griffin v. Thayer) 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
Griffin v. Thayer, 98 S.E. 201, 111 S.C. 456, 1919 S.C. LEXIS 46 (S.C. 1919).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Fraser.

Little need be said of the facts in this case, as only two questions are raised in the argument. The other exceptions were abandoned at the hearing.

*457 The plaintiff, an employee of the defendants, brought this action for damages for personal injuries. The trial Judge refused to submit to the jury the questions of assumption of risk and contributory negligence, inasmuch as assumption of risk and contributory negligence had not been pleaded. From these rulings this appeal is taken. Bota are affirmative defenses and must be pleaded in order to be available defense. Neither was pleaded, and his Honor, Judge Smith, could not have submitted either.

The rule is so well settled that a review, or even a citation of authorities, is unnecessary.

The judgment is affirmed.

Messrs. Justice Hydrick, Watts and Gage concur. Mr. Chieb Justice Gary did not sit.

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

Related

McKinney v. Woodside Cotton Mills
166 S.E. 499 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1932)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
98 S.E. 201, 111 S.C. 456, 1919 S.C. LEXIS 46, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffin-v-thayer-sc-1919.