Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1912

Hewlett v. South Bound R. R.

Hewlett v. South Bound R. R.
Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided October 30, 1912 · Watts
76 S.E. 32; 93 S.C. 76; 1912 S.C. LEXIS 298 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Messrs. Hardy Best and Lyles Lyles , for appellants, cite: The amendment substantially changes the claim: 21 S.C. 225 , 242 ; 26 S.C. 423 ; 59 S.C. 87 ; 49 S.C. 515 . The amendment is an abuse of discretion: 1 Cyc. 219; 47 S.C. 498 ; 81 S.C. 597 ; 83 S.C. 577 . Messrs. J.H. Patterson and R.C. Holman , contra.

Hewlett v. South Bound R. R.

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

I think the exceptions should be overruled and the judgment affirmed. The Circuit Judge had authority to allow the amendment under sections 190, 191, 193 and 194 of the Code of Laws and under authority of Booth v. Langley, 51 S. C. 415, 29 S. E. 204; Mew v. Railway Co., 55 S. C. 99, 32 S. E. 528; Spears v. A. C. L. R. R. Co., 92 S. C. 297.

It was a matter entirely within his discretion and he did not erroneously exercise that discretion.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.