State Ex Rel. jno.M. Daniel, Atty. Gen. v. Davis

Supreme Court of South Carolina

State Ex Rel. jno.M. Daniel, Atty. Gen. v. Davis

174 S.E. 927, 173 S.C. 62, 1934 S.C. LEXIS 128

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedMay 15, 1934

Docket13850

StatusPublished

This text of 174 S.E. 927 (State Ex Rel. jno.M. Daniel, Atty. Gen. v. Davis) 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. jno.M. Daniel, Atty. Gen. v. Davis, 174 S.E. 927, 173 S.C. 62, 1934 S.C. LEXIS 128 (S.C. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Per curiam.

This action, brought in the original jurisdiction of the Court, is in the nature of quo warranto■ “to try the title of *63 the defendant to the office of superintendent of the county home of Greenville County.” Upon examination of the record, made up of the pleadings, notices, and affidavits filed in the case, we find that additional evidence is necessary, there being disputed matters of fact, for a proper disposition of the questions presented. While the Court might exercise its power, as is suggested, to frame and certify to the Circuit Court issues for the determination of questions of fact, we think, for satisfactory reasons, that the better and more expeditious plan would be to dismiss this proceeding, without prejudice to the rights of the plaintiffs to bring an action in the Court of Common Pleas for Green-ville County, if they be so advised, for hearing and determination in that Court of the matters here sought to be litigated. And it is so ordered.

Mr. Chief Justice BeEase, Messrs. Justices StabeEr, Carter and Bonham and Mr. Acting Associate Justice W. C. Cothran concur.

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

Per curiam.

This action, brought in the original jurisdiction of the Court, is in the nature of quo warranto■ “to try the title of *63 the defendant to the office of superintendent of the county home of Greenville County.” Upon examination of the record, made up of the pleadings, notices, and affidavits filed in the case, we find that additional evidence is necessary, there being disputed matters of fact, for a proper disposition of the questions presented. While the Court might exercise its power, as is suggested, to frame and certify to the Circuit Court issues for the determination of questions of fact, we think, for satisfactory reasons, that the better and more expeditious plan would be to dismiss this proceeding, without prejudice to the rights of the plaintiffs to bring an action in the Court of Common Pleas for Green-ville County, if they be so advised, for hearing and determination in that Court of the matters here sought to be litigated. And it is so ordered.

Mr. Chief Justice BeEase, Messrs. Justices StabeEr, Carter and Bonham and Mr. Acting Associate Justice W. C. Cothran concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 S.E. 927, 173 S.C. 62, 1934 S.C. LEXIS 128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-jnom-daniel-atty-gen-v-davis-sc-1934.