Parks v. Duke

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Parks v. Duke

13 S.C.L. 380

DecidedMay 15, 1823

StatusPublished

This text of 13 S.C.L. 380 (Parks v. Duke) 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

Parks v. Duke, 13 S.C.L. 380 (S.C. 1823).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Colcock

delivered the opinion of the court:

./This is certainly not a negotiable note. It is under seal. The scrawl must be considered as a seal, because it is clear the parties so considered it. The attestation of the maker says under my hand and seal. The plaintiff was not then liable to be sued as indorser, and might have defended himself against the suit and non suited the holder./ It was then his own fault that he has been subjected to costs, and consequently he has no right to recover them back from the defendant.

The motion is granted.

Justices Johnson, Huger, Gantt and Nott, concurred-

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

Mr. Justice Colcock

delivered the opinion of the court:

./This is certainly not a negotiable note. It is under seal. The scrawl must be considered as a seal, because it is clear the parties so considered it. The attestation of the maker says under my hand and seal. The plaintiff was not then liable to be sued as indorser, and might have defended himself against the suit and non suited the holder./ It was then his own fault that he has been subjected to costs, and consequently he has no right to recover them back from the defendant.

The motion is granted.

Justices Johnson, Huger, Gantt and Nott, concurred-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 S.C.L. 380, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parks-v-duke-sc-1823.