Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1943

Rush v. Thompson

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided July 26, 1943 · Messrs, Bakeeí, Fishburne, Stukes, Sease, Henderson

26 S.E.2d 411; 203 S.C. 106; 1943 S.C. LEXIS 84 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. Henry E. Davis and Messrs. Royall Wright , all of Florence, S.C. Counsel for Appellant, cite: As to error of Trial Judge in holding that Mortgagor-Plaintiff was entitled to Jury Trial, and in Staying Equity Suit of Appellant against said Mortgagor-Plaintiff: 132 S.C. 410 , 129 S.E., 629 ; 17 S.C. 32 ; 27 S.C. 408 , 3 S.E., 781 ; 108 S.C. 206 ,. Messrs. McEachin Townsend , of Florence, S.C. Counsel for Respondent, cite: As to Cause of Action in Law Case: 178 S.C. 111 , 182 S.E., 319 ; 117 S.C. 137 , 108 S.E., 189 ; 186 S.C. 77 , 194 S.E., 636 ; 26 S.C. 415 , 2 S.E., 314 ; 97 S.C. 178 , 81 S.E., 424 ; 100 S.C. 397 , 84 S.E., 992 ; 179 S.C. 506 , 184 S.E., 105 ; 92 S.C. 501 , 75 S.E., 889 ; 99 S.C. 31 , 82 S.E., 997 ; 115 S.C. 452 , 106 S.E., 473 ; 116 S.C. 92 , 107 S.E., 320 ; 119 S.C. 273 , 112 S.E., 94 ; 120 S.C. 232 , 113 S.E., 78 ; 125 S.C. 187 , 118 S.E., 308 ; 129 S.C. 367 , 124 S.E., 780 ; 112 S.C. 356 ,, 24 S.E., 2d 266.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

After a careful study and consideration of the record in this case, in the light of the issues made by the exceptions, and after considering the briefs of counsel, we are of'the opinion that the Circuit Court in its well-considered decree, correctly decided the case. We adopt that decree as the judgment of this Court. Let it be reported.

Judgment affirmed.

Messrs. Associate Justices Bakeeí, Fishburne and Stukes, and Circuit Judges SeasE and Henderson, Acting Associate Justices, concur.

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