Holland v. Kemp

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Holland v. Kemp

3 S.E. 83, 27 S.C. 623, 1887 S.C. LEXIS 163

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedJuly 12, 1887

DocketNo. 2092

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 3 S.E. 83 (Holland v. Kemp) 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

Holland v. Kemp, 3 S.E. 83, 27 S.C. 623, 1887 S.C. LEXIS 163 (S.C. 1887).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Justice McGowan,

The complaint alleged as a first cause of action, the execution by defendant to plaintiff of a sealed note which was copied into the complaint; as a second cause of action, the like execution of another sealed note which was copied; and as a third cause of action, the like execution of still another note, which was copied; then followed a paragraph stating in the aggregate the amount due on the three notes and demanding judgment therefor. Defendant demurred separately to the three causes of action, that they did not in themselves state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The demurrers were overruled by the Circuit Judge (Hudson) and defendant appealed. Held, that the three causes of action were sufficiently stated; but that there was really only one cause of action embracing three items. And moreover, if imperfectly stated, the proper remedy is not demurrer, but motion before trial to make the averments more definite.

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

Opinion by

Mr. Justice McGowan,

The complaint alleged as a first cause of action, the execution by defendant to plaintiff of a sealed note which was copied into the complaint; as a second cause of action, the like execution of another sealed note which was copied; and as a third cause of action, the like execution of still another note, which was copied; then followed a paragraph stating in the aggregate the amount due on the three notes and demanding judgment therefor. Defendant demurred separately to the three causes of action, that they did not in themselves state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The demurrers were overruled by the Circuit Judge (Hudson) and defendant appealed. Held, that the three causes of action were sufficiently stated; but that there was really only one cause of action embracing three items. And moreover, if imperfectly stated, the proper remedy is not demurrer, but motion before trial to make the averments more definite.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 S.E. 83, 27 S.C. 623, 1887 S.C. LEXIS 163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holland-v-kemp-sc-1887.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack