J. I. Gracy & Co. v. Wright

Supreme Court of South Carolina

J. I. Gracy & Co. v. Wright

13 S.C.L. 278

DecidedNovember 15, 1822

StatusPublished

This text of 13 S.C.L. 278 (J. I. Gracy & Co. v. Wright) 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

J. I. Gracy & Co. v. Wright, 13 S.C.L. 278 (S.C. 1822).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Johnson

delivered the opinion of the court:

If it were necessary, the most ample reasons might he given in support of the opinion expressed iri the court below, as tending to the prompt and efficient administration of justice without prejudice to either party, and at the least possible expense. All that is necessaiy however to a rule of practice is, that it should he fixed arid known.— The concurrence of the court in the opinion expressed in the court below is therefore all that is necessaiy for the purposes of the present case.

The motions are refused.

Justices Huger, Gantt, Noti and Richardson, concurred.

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

Mr. Justice Johnson

delivered the opinion of the court:

If it were necessary, the most ample reasons might he given in support of the opinion expressed iri the court below, as tending to the prompt and efficient administration of justice without prejudice to either party, and at the least possible expense. All that is necessaiy however to a rule of practice is, that it should he fixed arid known.— The concurrence of the court in the opinion expressed in the court below is therefore all that is necessaiy for the purposes of the present case.

The motions are refused.

Justices Huger, Gantt, Noti and Richardson, concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 S.C.L. 278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-i-gracy-co-v-wright-sc-1822.