Sizemore v. Jennings

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Sizemore v. Jennings

70 S.E. 726, 88 S.C. 243, 1911 S.C. LEXIS 117

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedMarch 27, 1911

Docket7842

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 70 S.E. 726 (Sizemore v. Jennings) 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

Sizemore v. Jennings, 70 S.E. 726, 88 S.C. 243, 1911 S.C. LEXIS 117 (S.C. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Woods.

This is an appeal from a decree of Hon. J. W. DeVore, Circuit Judge, enjoining the defendant from disposing of certain real estate described in the complaint. The facts alleged in complaint are fully stated in the Circuit decree, and the reasoning of the Circuit Judge so clearly vindicates his conclusions of law. that we shall add very little to what he has said.

1 The main ground of appeal is that the Circuit Judge based his finding, that the plaintiff 'had made out a prima facie case for temporary injunction on the complaint alone without taking into consideration the answer and afifidavits submitted by the defendant in opposition to the motion. The answer and these affidavits were before the Circuit Judge, and we must assume that he gave them consideration in the absence of any statement in the decree to the contrary. The complaint and answer and affidavits made serious issues of facts as to the merits of the case. Prom consideration of these issues we agree with the Circuit Judge that without an injunction a judgment in favor of the plaintiff on the trial would probably be fruitless. On the other hand, the defendant could suffer no loss from the injunction except the temporary suspension of her power of alienation. No statement of the law on the subject is necessary, as it has been set out in recent cases. *249 Marion County Lumber Co. v. Tilghman Lumber Co., 75 S. C. 220, 55 S. E. 337; Boyd v. Trexler, 84 S. C., 51, 65 S. E. 936.

2 As 'held in the Circuit decree, the point that the action was prematurely brought is disposed) of by the case of Payne v. Melton, 67 S. C. 233, 45 S. E. 154. It is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be affirmed.

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

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Woods.

This is an appeal from a decree of Hon. J. W. DeVore, Circuit Judge, enjoining the defendant from disposing of certain real estate described in the complaint. The facts alleged in complaint are fully stated in the Circuit decree, and the reasoning of the Circuit Judge so clearly vindicates his conclusions of law. that we shall add very little to what he has said.

1 The main ground of appeal is that the Circuit Judge based his finding, that the plaintiff 'had made out a prima facie case for temporary injunction on the complaint alone without taking into consideration the answer and afifidavits submitted by the defendant in opposition to the motion. The answer and these affidavits were before the Circuit Judge, and we must assume that he gave them consideration in the absence of any statement in the decree to the contrary. The complaint and answer and affidavits made serious issues of facts as to the merits of the case. Prom consideration of these issues we agree with the Circuit Judge that without an injunction a judgment in favor of the plaintiff on the trial would probably be fruitless. On the other hand, the defendant could suffer no loss from the injunction except the temporary suspension of her power of alienation. No statement of the law on the subject is necessary, as it has been set out in recent cases. *249 Marion County Lumber Co. v. Tilghman Lumber Co., 75 S. C. 220, 55 S. E. 337; Boyd v. Trexler, 84 S. C., 51, 65 S. E. 936.

2 As 'held in the Circuit decree, the point that the action was prematurely brought is disposed) of by the case of Payne v. Melton, 67 S. C. 233, 45 S. E. 154. It is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

70 S.E. 726, 88 S.C. 243, 1911 S.C. LEXIS 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sizemore-v-jennings-sc-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack