Miller v. Goodwin

98 S.E. 129, 111 S.C. 333, 1919 S.C. LEXIS 22
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided January 21, 1919·No. 10125·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

*334 1, 2 *333 This is an appeal from an order of his Honor, Judge Townsend, resident Judge of the Fifth Circuit, referring *334 the cause to the master made in term time while a‘ presiding Judge was holding the Court of the Fifth Circuit. Notice having been given that application would be made to the presiding Judge for an order of reference, but this notice was withdrawn,' and notice given that application would be made to the resident Judge. The appeal raises the question whether the resident Circuit Judge at chambers has jurisdiction to grant after notice an order of reference to take testimony after notice of application for a similar order has been made that application would be made to the presiding Judge holding Court in the same county. There is no merit in the' appeal. An order of this kind can be made either by the presiding or resident Judge after proper notice. No substantial rights of the appellants have been violated, and the order appealed from is not appealable.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Miller v. Goodwin, 98 S.E. 129, 111 S.C. 333, 1919 S.C. LEXIS 22 (S.C. 1919).

98 S.E. 129 (Miller v. Goodwin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Miller v. Goodwin
101 S.E. 834 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1920)