Bishop v. Jacobs

• Decision Date: 27 July 1917
• Docket Number: 9783.
• Citation: 93 S.E. 243,108 S.C. 49
• Parties: BISHOP v. JACOBS.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

93 S.E. 243

108 S.C. 49

BISHOP v. JACOBS.

No. 9783.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

July 27, 1917

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Richland County; Mendel L Smith, Judge.

Action by Thomas W. Bishop against Hampton Jacobs.From an order allowing defendant to answer after he was in default plaintiff appeals.Affirmed.

Henry F. Jennings, of Columbia, for appellant.

W Hampton Cobb, of Columbia, for respondent.

GAGE J.

The appeal is from an order of the circuit court which allowed the defendant to answer after he was in default.Section 225 Code of Procedure.

The appellant's counsel says in the printed argument "The exceptions raise but one question of abuse of discretion."That unfortunate terminology means the commission of error which is manifest.It is true the exercise of discretion by a judge does not mean the same thing as the exercise of his desire in a given case.It is true one judge might exercise his discretion one way, and another judge might exercise it another way, on the same state of facts.In the nature of the case, then, there must be latitude in which the judicial discretion may move; and that means a hard and fast rule for the exercise of discretion cannot be stated.The lawmakers did not intend that parties shall be held down to the strict duty to answer within 20 days; they recognized human frailty, and provided a way of escape in the...