Martin v. McMurphy

7 S.C.L. 762
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided April 15, 1816·Published

Opinion

Nott, J.

The only ground for the prohibition in this case, was the want of a written lease. The magistrates in answer to the rule to show cause, merely certified their proceedings, and require the court to determine the question upon a view of these proceedings. They do not shew that there was any written lease, nor was it even pretended. Indeed the return was a tacit acknowledgment that the allegation in the suggestion was true. The prohibition, therefore, was properly granted; for magistrates have no such jurisdiction, except where there is a written lease. The motion must, therefore, be rejected.

Justices Grimke, Smith, Bay and Colcock concurred.

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

Martin v. McMurphy, 7 S.C.L. 762 (S.C. 1816).

7 S.C.L. 762 (Martin v. McMurphy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.