Byrum v. Barnes

Decision Date06 March 1883
Docket NumberNo. 1351.,1351.
Citation18 S.C. 606
PartiesMcGRATH and Byrum v. BARNES.
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HEREOpinion by Mr. Chief Justice SIMPSON.

Action on note stated in the complaint and admitted in the answer. The defense was, that the note was a mere memorandum given under a certain agreement, and testimonywas introduced to prove this agreement. This was held error on a previous appeal in this case, reported 13 S. C. 328. At the second trial, without any amendment of the pleadings, defendant offered to prove that the account for which the note was given contained overcharges, and that there was nothing due thereon when this note was given. The presiding judge (Aldrich) ruled that this testimony was incompetent. Held, that this ruling was correct, the testimony offered not being pertinent to any issue raised in the pleadings.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Bank Of Charleston Nat. Banking Ass'n v. Dowling
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 19, 1898
    ...by the pleadings. Nor can he avail himself of evidence which appears in the record which is not responsive to the issues. In McGrath v. Barnes, 18 S. C. 606, answer alleged 'note was mere memorandum given under certain agreement.' Defendant offered proof to show that the account for which t......
  • Hibernia Sa v. Inst
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • June 17, 1891
    ...admitted by the answer, I do not consider the testimony competent, not being pertinent to any issue raised in the pleadings. See McOrath v. Barnes, 18 S. C. 606; Mitchell v. De Graffenreid, Harp. 451. Discarding Mrs. Luhn's testimony upon this point, therefore, from consideration, there rem......
  • Hibernia Sav. Inst. v. Luhn
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • June 17, 1891
    ...admitted by the answer, I do not consider the testimony competent, not being pertinent to any issue raised in the pleadings. See McGrath v. Barnes, 18 S.C. 606; Mitchell v. Graffenreid, Harp. 451. Discarding Mrs. Luhn's testimony upon this point, therefore, from consideration, there remains......
  • Bank of Charleston Nat. Banking Ass'n v. Dowling
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 19, 1898
    ... ... Nor can he ... avail himself of evidence which appears in the record which ... is not responsive to the issues. In McGrath v ... Barnes, 18 S.C. 606, answer alleged 'note was mere ... memorandum given under certain agreement.' Defendant ... offered proof to show that the account ... ...

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