Sparks v. D. M. Dew & Sons, Inc.
This text of 96 S.E.2d 488 (Sparks v. D. M. Dew & Sons, Inc.) 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.
Opinion
This appeal comes from the Court of Common Pleas for Dillon County from an order of the Honorable J. Woodrow Lewis refusing to strike certain allegations of the complaint upon the ground that said allegations were irrelevant and redundant.
Respondent in this case seeks to recover damages allegedly sustained when a fire which destroyed appellant’s warehouse and cotton stored therein spread to the adjoining premises and destroyed respondent’s tools of trade, working materials and other personal property.
An order refusing to strike allegations in the pleadings as irrelevant and redundant is not appealable. Harbert v. Atlanta & C. A. L. Ry., 74 S. C. 13, *509 53 S. E. 1001; Strait v. British & American Mortgage Co.. 77 S. C. 367, 57 S. E. 1100; Citizens’ & Marine Bank v. Witcover, 77 S. C. 441, 58 S. E. 146; Cooper v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 78 S. C. 562, 59 S. E. 704; McCandless v. Mobley, 81 S. C. 303, 62 S. E. 260; Woodward v. Woodward, 87 S. C. 247, 69 S. E. 232.
Upon trial, however, appellant will not by the order appealed from or this opinion be precluded or in any wise prejudiced in its efforts to exclude such testimony as may be offered in support of the allegations sought to be stricken from the complaint. Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
96 S.E.2d 488, 230 S.C. 507, 1957 S.C. LEXIS 121, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sparks-v-d-m-dew-sons-inc-sc-1957.