Mattison v. Glenn

109 S.E. 105, 117 S.C. 404, 1921 S.C. LEXIS 152

Opinions

October 10, 1921. The opinion of the Court was delivered by In view of the conflicting and confused state of the testimony in this case, the Circuit Judge has arrived at the justice of it as nearly as we might hope to do, with these exceptions:

(1) The defendant should account for the good cotton at 28 cents per pound and the off-grade at 25 cents per pound; the rule in the Rainwater Case, 114 S.C. 358,103 S.E. 587, does not justify charging him with more than the market value at the time settlement was demanded, with interest from that date, November 1, 1918; the interest to be calculated upon the balance ascertained to be due by the defendant to the plaintiff as of that date.

(2) The defendant should account for the bottom corn, $20, that being the amount claimed in the complaint.

(3) The defendant should not be required to account for more than $2 for cane seed furnished by the plaintiff, as he testifies that he only bought one-half bushel at $4 per bushel.

The account between the parties would then stand thus:

Defendant Account .............................. $2,034 74
Less items disallowed ..........................    159 32
                                                 _________
                                                 $1,875 42

   The plaintiff's account:
Cotton seed ....................... $    41 38
Bottom corn .......................      20 00
Cane seed .........................       2 00
Good cotton .......................   1,426 60
Bad cotton ........................     504 75    1,994 73
                                    __________   _________
    Balance due plaintiff .....................  $  119 31

— with interest from November 1, 1918, at 7 per cent. per annum.

The judgment of this Court is that the judgment of the Circuit Court, as thus modified, be affirmed; all costs to be paid by the defendant.

JUSTICES WATTS and FRASER concur.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE GARY: I dissent. The judgment of the Circuit Court should not be modified, but affirmed, for the reasons therein stated.