Bank of Augusta v. Satcher Motor Co., No. 18595

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtLEWIS; MOSS, C.J., BUSSEY and BRAILSFORD, JJ., and LIONEL K. LEGGE
Citation249 S.C. 53,152 S.E.2d 676
PartiesThe BANK OF AUGUSTA, Respondent, v. SATCHER MOTOR COMPANY, Inc., Commercial Credit Corporation, Appellants, and Robert L. Brown, Respondent.
Decision Date12 January 1967
Docket NumberNo. 18595

Page 676

152 S.E.2d 676
249 S.C. 53
The BANK OF AUGUSTA, Respondent,
v.
SATCHER MOTOR COMPANY, Inc., Commercial Credit Corporation, Appellants,
and
Robert L. Brown, Respondent.
No. 18595.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
Jan. 12, 1967.

[249 S.C. 55]

Page 677

Williams & Johnson, Aiken, for appellants.

N. Melch Morrisette, Marchant, Bristow & Bates, Columbia, for respondents.

[249 S.C. 56] LEWIS, Justice.

This action for declaratory judgment was instituted by plaintiff, The Bank of Augusta, against the defendants, Satcher Motor Company, Inc., Commercial Credit Corporation, and Robert L. Brown to have determined the priority of the lien of a mortgage held by plaintiff over a certain 1965 Ford automobile. The defendant Brown filed an answer to the complaint and also a cross action for damages against the defendant Satcher Motor Company. Satcher and Commercial demurred to the complaint and Satcher in addition filed a demurrer to the cross action. The lower court overruled the demurrers and Satcher and Commercial have appealed from the order so entered. Since the demurrers to the complaint and the demurrer to the cross action present somewhat different issues, they will be considered separately.

Demurrers to the Complaint.

The complaint alleged that on or about January 19, 1965, one L. E. Pate executed to plaintiff a chattel mortgage over a 1965 Ford automobile, securing the payment of a note in the amount of $3,423.60; that at the time of the execution of the mortgage Pate had in his possession the original manufacturer's certificate of origin for the automobile, issued by the defendant Satcher Motor Company showing no lien or encumbrance

Page 678

thereon; that thereafter Satcher, wilfully[249 S.C. 57] and without legal process, by the use of duplicate keys took possession of the automobile from the said Pate and converted the same to its own use; that Satcher subsequently, on or about May 24, 1965, sold the automobile to defendant Brown and issued to Brown a duplicate manufacturer's certificate of origin (the original certificate allegedly having been previously issued to Pate), showing thereon a lien on the vehicle in favor of Commercial in the amount of $3,436.15; that plaintiff's mortgage constituted a first lien on the vehicle; that default had been made in the payments due thereon; and plaintiff is entitled to possession of the automobile under the terms of its note and mortgage.

The prayer for relief seeks a declaratory judgment (1) that the lien of plaintiff's mortgage is prior to the claims of the defendants, (2) that plaintiff is entitled to immediate possession of the automobile in accordance with the terms of its note and mortgage, and (3) that the seizure of the automobile by Satcher from Pate (plaintiff's mortgagor) was unlawful and constituted a conversion thereof. No monetary judgment is sought by plaintiff against any of the defendants.

The defendants Satcher Motor Company and Commercial Credit Company interposed separate demurrers to the complaint, which present substantially the same issues on appeal. All questions before us under these demurrers may be properly disposed of by a determination of (1) whether the complaint states a cause of action for declaratory judgment and (2) whether several causes of action have been improperly joined in the complaint. These will be disposed of in the order stated.

The complaint is not subject to demurrer for failure to state a cause of action for declaratory judgment if the facts alleged show the existence of a justiciable controversy between the parties. Foster v. Foster, 226 S.C. 130, 83 S.E.2d 752; Dantzler v. Callison, 227 S.C. 317, 88 S.E.2d 64; Plenge v. Russell, 236 S.C. 473, 115 S.E.2d 177; Hardwick v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 practice notes
  • Committee v. City of Myrtle Beach, No. 27249.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 8, 2013
    ...Ann. § 59–21–1010(A) & (B) (2004). 2. S.C.Code Ann. §§ 15–52–10 to –140 (Supp.2012). 3.See e.g. Bank of Augusta v. Satcher Motor Co., 249 S.C. 53, 152 S.E.2d 676...
  • Guimarin & Doan, Inc. v. Georgetown Textile & Mfg. Co., No. 18665
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • June 9, 1967
    ...of the interrelated rights and liabilities of the parties under the contracts. Compare Bank of Augusta v. Stacher Motor Co., S.C., 152 S.E.2d 676, in which a like conclusion was Apparently, appellants view each of the alternative theories stated in the complaint concerning the cause of Geor......
  • Tourism Expenditure Review Comm. v. City of Myrtle Beach, Appellate Case No. 2011-200407
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 8, 2013
    ...Ann. § 59-21-1010(A) & (B) (2004). 2. S.C. Code Ann. §§ 15-52-10 to -140 (Supp. 2012). 3. See e.g. Bank of Augusta v. Satcher Motor Co., 249 S.C. 53, 152 S.E.2d 676...
  • Robison v. Asbill, No. 2719
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • September 29, 1997
    ...petition to a court having jurisdiction" to grant "further relief" "whenever necessary or proper"); Bank of Augusta v. Satcher Motor Co., 249 S.C. 53, 152 S.E.2d 676 (1967) (stating S.C.Code § 10-201 (1962) (current version at S.C.Code Ann. § 15-53-120 (1976)) permits a court to grant not o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
15 cases
  • Committee v. City of Myrtle Beach, No. 27249.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 8, 2013
    ...Ann. § 59–21–1010(A) & (B) (2004). 2. S.C.Code Ann. §§ 15–52–10 to –140 (Supp.2012). 3.See e.g. Bank of Augusta v. Satcher Motor Co., 249 S.C. 53, 152 S.E.2d 676...
  • Guimarin & Doan, Inc. v. Georgetown Textile & Mfg. Co., No. 18665
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • June 9, 1967
    ...of the interrelated rights and liabilities of the parties under the contracts. Compare Bank of Augusta v. Stacher Motor Co., S.C., 152 S.E.2d 676, in which a like conclusion was Apparently, appellants view each of the alternative theories stated in the complaint concerning the cause of Geor......
  • Tourism Expenditure Review Comm. v. City of Myrtle Beach, Appellate Case No. 2011-200407
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 8, 2013
    ...Ann. § 59-21-1010(A) & (B) (2004). 2. S.C. Code Ann. §§ 15-52-10 to -140 (Supp. 2012). 3. See e.g. Bank of Augusta v. Satcher Motor Co., 249 S.C. 53, 152 S.E.2d 676...
  • Robison v. Asbill, No. 2719
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • September 29, 1997
    ...petition to a court having jurisdiction" to grant "further relief" "whenever necessary or proper"); Bank of Augusta v. Satcher Motor Co., 249 S.C. 53, 152 S.E.2d 676 (1967) (stating S.C.Code § 10-201 (1962) (current version at S.C.Code Ann. § 15-53-120 (1976)) permits a court to grant not o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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