Rish v. Jackson
This text of 147 S.E. 324 (Rish v. Jackson) 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.
Opinions
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
This is an appeal from a decree of his Honor Judge Rice. For a proper understanding of the case, the decree of Judge Rice will be reported.
*342 There are five exceptions.
Chief Justice Gary, in the case of Hickson Lumber Co. v. Stallings, 91 S. C., 473, 74 S. E., 1072, uses this language: “It was incumbent on the appellant, to satisfy this Court, by the preponderance of the evidence, that his Honor, the presiding Judge, erred in his findings of fact,” which he has failed to do. Also Leland, v. Morrison, 92 S. C., 510, 75 S. E., 889, Ann. Cas., 1914-B, 349; Simmons v. Pender, 124 S. C., 506, 117 S. E., 731; Amick v. Wessinger, 125 S. C., 68, 118 S. E., 32; Boozer v. Gunter, 127 S. C., 141, 120 S. E., 749.
There is ample testimony to support the decree of Judge Rice.
All of the exceptions are overruled and judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
147 S.E. 324, 149 S.C. 338, 1929 S.C. LEXIS 97, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rish-v-jackson-sc-1929.