State v. O'Conner

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

State v. O'Conner

24 S.C.L. 150

DecidedFebruary 15, 1839

StatusPublished

This text of 24 S.C.L. 150 (State v. O'Conner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals 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 v. O'Conner, 24 S.C.L. 150 (S.C. Ct. App. 1839).

Pincite

Opinion

Cuhia, per O’Neall, J.

This court concurs in the point of law ruled by the judge below. His judgment has the sanction of the case of Woodward v. Hill, 3 M'Cord. Rep. 241.

The motion is dismissed.

E. & A, Rhett, for the motion. Solicitor Edwards, contra. Evans and Butler, Justices, concurred. Richardson, J. absent from indisposition. Earle, J. absent at the hearing, but concurred in the judgment.

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

Cuhia, per O’Neall, J.

This court concurs in the point of law ruled by the judge below. His judgment has the sanction of the case of Woodward v. Hill, 3 M'Cord. Rep. 241.

The motion is dismissed.

E. & A, Rhett, for the motion. Solicitor Edwards, contra. Evans and Butler, Justices, concurred. Richardson, J. absent from indisposition. Earle, J. absent at the hearing, but concurred in the judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 S.C.L. 150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-oconner-scctapp-1839.