Skip to the main content
Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Statutes
Free Legal Archive /South Carolina /Cases /Supreme Court of South Carolina /

1916

295 Supreme Court of South Carolina opinions from 1916.

  • State v. Kilgore 89 S.E. 668, (S.C. 1916)
  • Carolina & N. W. Ry. Co. v. Ford 89 S.E. 809, (S.C. 1916)
  • Thomas v. Greenville-Carolina Power Co. 89 S.E. 552, (S.C. 1916)
  • Barnett v. Gottlieb 89 S.E. 641, (S.C. 1916)
  • Boyd v. Hall 89 S.E. 403, (S.C. 1916)
  • O'Farrell v. Poston 89 S.E. 483, (S.C. 1916)
  • Cleckley v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. 90 S.E. 32, (S.C. 1916)
  • Cordele v. Hampton Cotton Mills Co. 89 S.E. 498, (S.C. 1916)
  • Manship v. Newton Et Ux. 89 S.E. 467, (S.C. 1916)
  • Manship v. Newton 105 S.C. 1, (S.C. 1916)
  • Greenwood Cotton Mills v. Tolbert 89 S.E. 653, (S.C. 1916)
  • Huey v. Hamilton-Carhartt Cotton Mills 89 S.E. 477, (S.C. 1916)
  • Bass v. Western Union Telegraph Co. 90 S.E. 155, (S.C. 1916)
  • Stroy v. Nicpee 89 S.E. 666, (S.C. 1916)
  • Whitesides v. Whisonant 89 S.E. 465, (S.C. 1916)
  • Ashe v. Southern Ry. Co. 89 S.E. 482, (S.C. 1916)
  • Hamilton v. Stubbs Co. 89 S.E. 553, (S.C. 1916)
  • B. F. Avery & Son v. Bennett 89 S.E. 466, (S.C. 1916)
  • Singleton v. Cuttino 89 S.E. 385, (S.C. 1916)
  • Gill v. Ruggles 89 S.E. 503, (S.C. 1916)
  • Coe-Mortimer Co. v. Briggs 89 S.E. 553, (S.C. 1916)
  • Southern Railway Co. v. Wilmot Oil Mills 89 S.E. 476, (S.C. 1916)
  • Lewis v. Williams 89 S.E. 647, (S.C. 1916)
  • State v. Messervey 89 S.E. 662, (S.C. 1916)
  • Gregory v. Sovereign Camp of Woodmen of the World 89 S.E. 391, (S.C. 1916)
  • Town of Newberry v. Dorrah 89 S.E. 402, (S.C. 1916)
  • Keels v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. 89 S.E. 388, (S.C. 1916)
  • Dial v. Gardner 89 S.E. 396, (S.C. 1916)
  • Buckeye Cotton Oil Co. v. Matheson 89 S.E. 478, (S.C. 1916)
  • Comer v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. 90 S.E. 188, (S.C. 1916)
  • Sutton v. Catawba Power Co. 89 S.E. 353, (S.C. 1916)
  • Hart v. Western Union Telegraph Co. 89 S.E. 387, (S.C. 1916)
  • Burden v. Woodside Cotton Mills 89 S.E. 474, (S.C. 1916)
  • Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co. v. Hunter 89 S.E. 393, (S.C. 1916)
  • Mikell v. McCreery-pressley Co. 89 S.E. 467, (S.C. 1916)
  • Dickson v. Eppes 89 S.E. 354, (S.C. 1916)
  • Simpson v. Western Union Telegraph Co. 89 S.E. 321, (S.C. 1916)
  • J. C. Lynch & Son v. Cusaac 89 S.E. 392, (S.C. 1916)
  • Smith v. Phifer 89 S.E. 323, (S.C. 1916)
  • Pates & Allen Co. v. Bowen 89 S.E. 356, (S.C. 1916)
  • Metts v. Charleston Theatre Co. 89 S.E. 389, (S.C. 1916)
  • Fass v. Atlantic Life Ins. Co. 89 S.E. 558, (S.C. 1916)
  • Dendy v. Dendy 89 S.E. 317, (S.C. 1916)
  • Friedheim v. Walter H. Hildic Co. 89 S.E. 358, (S.C. 1916)
  • Henry Mercantile Co. v. Georgetown & W. R. Co. 89 S.E. 480, (S.C. 1916)
  • Young v. Brabham 89 S.E. 472, (S.C. 1916)
  • Beacham v. City of Greenville 89 S.E. 401, (S.C. 1916)
  • Lawton-Gillespie Co. v. Amer. Cent. Ins. Co. 89 S.E. 385, (S.C. 1916)
  • Creswell v. Wardlaw 89 S.E. 317, (S.C. 1916)
  • Rish v. Wingard 89 S.E. 400, (S.C. 1916)
« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »

A public interest project of Aaron Hall, Attorney at Law © 2026

About Federal Minnesota California New York Texas Terms

Data from CourtListener / Free Law Project

↑