Jones v. Williams

Citation77 S.E. 710,94 S.C. 16
PartiesJONES v. WILLIAMS et al.
Decision Date15 March 1913
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Florence County; Geo. E. Prince, Judge.

"To be officially reported."

Action by Ella F. Jones against A. H. Williams and J. A. Green, copartners as A. H. Williams & Co., and others. From an order granting plaintiff leave to file a supplemental complaint, Williams, Green, and another appeal. Dismissed.

Le Roy Lee, of Kingstree, and Willcox & Willcox, of Florence, for appellants. W. L. Bass, of Tampa, Fla., and Walter Hazard, of Georgetown, for respondent.

GARY, C.J.

This is an appeal from an order granting to the plaintiff leave to file a supplemental complaint.

The rule governing appeals in such cases is thus stated in Copeland v. Copeland, 60 S.C. 135, 38 S.E. 269: "Since a supplemental pleading is in the nature of an amendment to the pleading, sought to be supplemented, the same rule should in reason apply, and must apply, if, as stated in Moon v. Johnson , supra, the matter rests in the discretion of the court. As stated by acting Associate Justice Benet in Norris v. Clinkscales, 47 S.C. 498 : 'The courts and text-writers all concur that by judicial discretion is meant sound discretion, guided by fixed legal principles. It must not be arbitrary nor capricious, but must be regulated upon legal grounds--ground that will make it judicial. It must be controlled by conscience and not by humor.' In an appeal from the exercise of this discretion, this court will not examine the evidence with a view to substitute its judgment as to its weight and sufficiency for that of the judge, to whose discretion the matter is submitted. We merely examine the evidence with a view to ascertain whether there was abuse of discretion--that is, whether the court's action was based upon his view of the evidence, or absence of evidence, or was but an arbitrary or capricious exercise of will, and without regard to the evidence."

The appellant has failed to satisfy this court that there was an abuse of discretion on the part of his honor, the circuit judge.

Appeal dismissed.

WOODS, HYDRICK, WATTS, and FRASER, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT