Bohumir Kryl Symphony Band Inc v. Allen Univ., 15189
Decision Date | 01 March 1940 |
Docket Number | No. 15189,15189 |
Citation | 12 S.E.2d 712 |
Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Parties | BOHUMIR KRYL SYMPHONY BAND, Inc., v. ALLEN UNIVERSITY. |
.
Appeal from County Court of Richland County; A. W. Holman, Judge.
Action by Bohumir Kryl Symphony Band, Inc., against Allen University for breach of contract. From a judgment for plaintiff notwithstanding the verdict, defendant appeals.
Reversed.
Cole L. Blease and Blease Ellison, both of Columbia, for appellant.
Harold C. Seigler, of Columbia, for respondent.
This is an action for the breach of a contract, alleged in the complaint of respondent to have been entered into with it by appellant, Allen University, in the language following:
The appellant in its answer qualifiedly admitted the above.paragraph of the complaint, said admission reading:
Paragraph 8 of the answer denied each and every allegation of the complaint not specifically admitted and demanded strict proof thereof.
Issue being thus joined, the case came on for trial, and in the course thereof, respondent (plaintiff) offered in evidence, without objection on the part of appellant (defendant), a contract of the purport of the one described in the complaint between respondent and one Eugene H. McGill; testimony that at the time of the execution of the contract, McGill was the President of Allen University; and letters to respondent from McGill on stationery of appellant, signed by him as President, in which he undertook to cancel the contract which he had signed.
At the conclusion of respondent's testimony, appellant made a motion for a nonsuit on the ground The ruling of the trial Judge was:
There is no appeal from the refusal of the trial Judge to grant the motion for nonsuit. Appellant's exception 3 alleges error in not directing a verdict in its (defendant's) favor, but the record does not disclose that such a motion was made, and therefore will not be considered.
The appellant (defendant) then proceeded with its testimony, all of which was finally stricken out except the charter of appellant, and the testimony reported immediately hereafter.
In reply respondent (plaintiff), without objection by appellant, offered testimony that other concert bands, orchestras and singers had given performances at Allen University prior to the date of the contract involved in the instant case.
At the conclusion of all of the testimony, respondent moved for a directed verdict, the apposite grounds being: "That the defendant (appellant) admits the execution of the contract and admits by his (its) pleadings the breach of it and sets up the defense only that the acts of the president were ultra vires * * *;" " * * * that the only reasonable inference that can be drawn from the testimony is that the acts of the president in the execution of this contract were under the authority that he had; that there was no evidence of the authority or lack of authority of the president to execute this contract and that by the pleadings and the lack of testimony we are entitled to a directed verdict for the amount of damages which we have proven." (Italics added.)
As usual, there was discussion of the motion by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
MICHELSON v. HOUSE
...191 Wash. 646, 71 P.2d 1003; Lessy v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 121 Pa.Super. 440, 183 A. 657; Bohumir Kryl Symphony Band, Inc., v. Allen University, 196 S.C. 173, 12 S.E.2d 712; Bartlett v. Stanchfield, 148 Mass. 394, 19 N.E. 549, 2 L.R.A. 625. The court, in granting summary judgme......
- Taylor v. Palmetto State Life Ins. Co.
-
Thomas v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
...judge to grant such a motion is limited to the grounds relied upon in the motion for directed verdict. Bohumir Kryl Symphony Bank v. Allen University, 196 S.C. 173, 12 S.E.2d 712. It follows that the only questions for review are whether it was error for the trial judge to refuse to grant d......
-
Hatchell v. McCracken
...174, Section 60g. Here, the damages were, of course, unliquidated and very much in dispute. In the case of Bohumir Kryl Symphony Band v. Allen University, 196 S.C. 173, 12 S.E.2d 712, this court 'Conceding, without so deciding, that the trial Judge had the power to grant respondent's motion......