Martin v. Blackwell

73 S.E. 629, 90 S.C. 351, 1912 S.C. LEXIS 73
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedFebruary 7, 1912
Docket8092
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 73 S.E. 629 (Martin v. Blackwell) 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
Martin v. Blackwell, 73 S.E. 629, 90 S.C. 351, 1912 S.C. LEXIS 73 (S.C. 1912).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon the consideration of the motion to dismiss the appeal it is ordered that the motion be refused. The Court will not dismiss an appeal merely because the stenographer has lost the notes of testimony. If the appellant is not able to comply with the demands of the respondent in making up the case and they carahot make up an agreed case, the remedy of the parties is to apply to the Circuit Judge under the statutes and rules of the Court to settle the case.

In this instance the time of the respondents to serve amendments to the proposed case has already elapsed, but under the circumstances it is ordered that the respondents have four days in which to serve their amendments to the proposed case, and that the matter proceed thereafter regularly under the statutes and rules of the Court.

Time for serving proposed amendments extended ten days.

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

Related

State v. Ricks
180 P. 257 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 S.E. 629, 90 S.C. 351, 1912 S.C. LEXIS 73, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-blackwell-sc-1912.