Pratt v. Tunno

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Pratt v. Tunno

4 S.C.L. 449

DecidedJanuary 15, 1811

StatusPublished

This text of 4 S.C.L. 449 (Pratt v. Tunno) 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

Pratt v. Tunno, 4 S.C.L. 449 (S.C. 1811).

Pincite

Opinion

The court,

after hearing Ward, for the defendants, and Cross, for the plaintiff, determined that defendants should have the benefit of a new trial, on the ground that many of the articles appeared to be luxuries, and not necessaries; and that the amount of the supplies-was extravagant and unreasonable. Some of the judges were of opinion the general rule does not authorize masters in the porff where the owner resides, to bind the owner for necessaries.

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

The court,

after hearing Ward, for the defendants, and Cross, for the plaintiff, determined that defendants should have the benefit of a new trial, on the ground that many of the articles appeared to be luxuries, and not necessaries; and that the amount of the supplies-was extravagant and unreasonable. Some of the judges were of opinion the general rule does not authorize masters in the porff where the owner resides, to bind the owner for necessaries.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 S.C.L. 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pratt-v-tunno-sc-1811.