Hughes v. Hampton

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Hughes v. Hampton, 7 S.C.L. 745 (S.C. 1815)
Bay, Brevard, Colcock, Grimke, Nott, Smith

Hughes v. Hampton

Opinion of the Court

Smith, J.

The charges were general ones for medicine and attendance. One item was, u 13 dollars for medicine and attendance on one of the general’s ° daughters, in curing the whooping cough.” The new trial is asked for, on the ground that the plaintiff ought to have given a specific bill of the medicine and attendance. I did think otherwise on hearing this ease j but on mature consideration I think the char-*746Ses were too general, and am, therefore, for grant" ing a new trial.

Justices Grimke, Nott, and Brevard concurred. Colcock and Bay dissented.

Reference

Full Case Name
John Hughes v. Wade Hampton
Status
Published