M'Mahon v. Taylor

Supreme Court of South Carolina

M'Mahon v. Taylor

9 S.C.L. 175

DecidedMay 15, 1818

StatusPublished

This text of 9 S.C.L. 175 (M'Mahon v. Taylor) 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

M'Mahon v. Taylor, 9 S.C.L. 175 (S.C. 1818).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the pourt was delivered by

Mr. Justice Bay.

I was of opinion 'at the trial that the verdict was correct, and that McMahon had no right or title to any part of this space or street, and am still of that opinion; and however Taylor may be liable to be indicted for a nuisance, for stopping up a space left for a street, that gave no right or title to M’-Mahon.

I am therefore of opinion that the motion for a new trial should be refused, and my brethren concur with me in this opinion.

JVoif, Colcock, Cheves, and Gantt, J. concurred. Johnson, J. having been concerned, gave nep. opinion.

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

The opinion of the pourt was delivered by

Mr. Justice Bay.

I was of opinion 'at the trial that the verdict was correct, and that McMahon had no right or title to any part of this space or street, and am still of that opinion; and however Taylor may be liable to be indicted for a nuisance, for stopping up a space left for a street, that gave no right or title to M’-Mahon.

I am therefore of opinion that the motion for a new trial should be refused, and my brethren concur with me in this opinion.

JVoif, Colcock, Cheves, and Gantt, J. concurred. Johnson, J. having been concerned, gave nep. opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 S.C.L. 175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mmahon-v-taylor-sc-1818.