State ex rel. C. C. & C. R. R. v. Harper

9 S.E. 664, 30 S.C. 586, 1889 S.C. LEXIS 135
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedApril 16, 1889
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 9 S.E. 664 (State ex rel. C. C. & C. R. R. v. Harper) 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
State ex rel. C. C. & C. R. R. v. Harper, 9 S.E. 664, 30 S.C. 586, 1889 S.C. LEXIS 135 (S.C. 1889).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered

Per Curiam.

The application for mandamus in this case was heard upon facts substantially the same as those in the recent case of State of South Carolina ex relatione The Charleston, Cincinnati & Chicago R. R. Co., et al., v. Robert Whitesides, chairman, et al.; and the questions of law involved are the same. Upon the authority of that case, therefore, the petition herein is dismissed, upon other grounds, however, than the alleged uneonstitutionality of the act of 1888, entitled -‘An act to provide for the. payment of township bonds issued in aid of railroads in this State,” which we hold constitutional. See State ex rel. C. C. & C. R. R. Co. v. Whitesides, ante, 579, and State ex rel. Dickinson v. Neely, next case post.

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

Related

Folsom v. Ninety-Six TP.
131 F. 496 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 S.E. 664, 30 S.C. 586, 1889 S.C. LEXIS 135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-c-c-c-r-r-v-harper-sc-1889.