Maynard v. Bank of Kershaw

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Maynard v. Bank of Kershaw

198 S.E. 188, 188 S.C. 160, 1938 S.C. LEXIS 140

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedJuly 21, 1938

Docket14728

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 198 S.E. 188 (Maynard v. Bank of Kershaw) 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

Maynard v. Bank of Kershaw, 198 S.E. 188, 188 S.C. 160, 1938 S.C. LEXIS 140 (S.C. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chiee Justice StabeEr.

This action was commenced in September, 1932, and was brought to recover damages “for the alleged breach of the condition to prosecute the action contained in a bond in a claim and delivery action.” By consent, the case was referred to the Master of Kershaw County, with directions to take the testimony and report to the Court on all issues of law and fact. This he did in due time, recommending judgment for the plaintiff for $1,100.00, with interest. On exceptions by the defendants, the matter was heard by his Honor, Judge Bellinger, who confirmed the report and adopted it as the judgment of the Court, stating in a short order that the Master’s “findings are amply justified by the law and the facts in this case.”

From a careful study of the case as a whole, with especial attention given to the questions stated and argued by counsel for the appellants, we are convinced that the Circuit Judge was right, and we approve the conclusions reached by him. The report of the Master, which this Court adopts as its opinion, will be incorporated in the report of the case. We deem it unnecessary to add anything to what is there said.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Messrs. Justices Bonham, Baker and Fishburne and Mr. Acting Associate Justice F. D. Fide concur. Mr. Justice Carter did not participate on account of illness.

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

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chiee Justice StabeEr.

This action was commenced in September, 1932, and was brought to recover damages “for the alleged breach of the condition to prosecute the action contained in a bond in a claim and delivery action.” By consent, the case was referred to the Master of Kershaw County, with directions to take the testimony and report to the Court on all issues of law and fact. This he did in due time, recommending judgment for the plaintiff for $1,100.00, with interest. On exceptions by the defendants, the matter was heard by his Honor, Judge Bellinger, who confirmed the report and adopted it as the judgment of the Court, stating in a short order that the Master’s “findings are amply justified by the law and the facts in this case.”

From a careful study of the case as a whole, with especial attention given to the questions stated and argued by counsel for the appellants, we are convinced that the Circuit Judge was right, and we approve the conclusions reached by him. The report of the Master, which this Court adopts as its opinion, will be incorporated in the report of the case. We deem it unnecessary to add anything to what is there said.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Messrs. Justices Bonham, Baker and Fishburne and Mr. Acting Associate Justice F. D. Fide concur. Mr. Justice Carter did not participate on account of illness.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 S.E. 188, 188 S.C. 160, 1938 S.C. LEXIS 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maynard-v-bank-of-kershaw-sc-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack