Mitchell v. Gibbes

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Mitchell v. Gibbes

2 S.C.L. 475

DecidedJuly 1, 1802

StatusPublished

This text of 2 S.C.L. 475 (Mitchell v. Gibbes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mitchell v. Gibbes, 2 S.C.L. 475 (S.C. Ct. App. 1802).

Pincite

Opinion

The Judges,

after hearing counsel on both sides, were of opinion, that if the discounts were such as were allowed by [476]*476our discount act, they ought to have been permitted to have gone to the jury as payments, if they were just and regular~ because payment by one joint and several obligor, on account of or in part of the same bond, may be pleaded by the other in a suit against him otherwise the bond might be paid twice, which would be against law and justice.

Rule for new trial made absolute~

~A1l the Judges present.~

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

The Judges,

after hearing counsel on both sides, were of opinion, that if the discounts were such as were allowed by [476]*476our discount act, they ought to have been permitted to have gone to the jury as payments, if they were just and regular~ because payment by one joint and several obligor, on account of or in part of the same bond, may be pleaded by the other in a suit against him otherwise the bond might be paid twice, which would be against law and justice.

Rule for new trial made absolute~

~A1l the Judges present.~

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 S.C.L. 475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mitchell-v-gibbes-scctapp-1802.