Godwin v. Richardson

• Decision Date: 12 April 1923
• Docket Number: 11186.
• Parties: GODWIN v. RICHARDSON.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

117 S.E. 202

123 S.C. 494

GODWIN v. RICHARDSON.

No. 11186.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

April 12, 1923

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Sumter County; John S Wilson, Judge.

Action by W. J. Godwin against B. W. Richardson. From an order vacating an attachment, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Gary C.J., and Watts, J., dissenting.

J. J Cantey, of Summerton, for appellant.

Harby Nash & Hodges, of Sumter, for respondent.

FRASER J.

The case shows:

"In the month of January, 1921, upon the verified complaint hereinafter set out and upon a properly executed bond, the appellant herein secured from the clerk of court for Clarendon county a warrant of attachment and attached the cross-ties of the respondent as alleged in the complaint. Thereafter the venue of the action was changed to Sumter county, where the action is duly docketed for trial on the merits. In the meantime the respondent moved before Judge John S. Wilson to vacate the attachment upon the grounds hereinafter set out, which motion was granted. Within due and proper time the appellant served due and proper notice of appeal to the Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Complaint.

(1) That the plaintiff is a resident of Clarendon county state aforesaid.

(2) That the defendant is a resident of Sumter county, state aforesaid.

(3) That some time since the plaintiff and defendant entered into a contract for the purpose of jointly cutting and selling railroad cross-ties, the substance of the contract being that the defendant was to advance the money necessary for the cutting of said cross-ties, and the plaintiff was to perform the manual labor and supervise the cutting and the getting out of said railroad cross-ties, and the plaintiff and the defendant mutually agreed to share the profits in equal proportions resulting from the sale of said cross-ties; that the plaintiff and defendant have jointly cut 4,000 cross-ties, or approximately that amount, upon the terms and conditions as aforesaid, and have sold and shipped some of said cross-ties and made arrangement for selling all of said cross-ties at a net profit to the plaintiff and the defendant in the sum of 30 cents per cross-tie; that all of said cross-ties have been shipped out of Clarendon county, S. C., except about 280 cross-ties at Summerton, and about 150 cross-ties at Silver, and about 300 cross-ties at the old depot or Mallard's station near Summerton, county of Clarendon, S. C., which said cross-ties the said defendant is about to remove, assign, dispose of, or secrete, with intent to defraud this plaintiff of his commissions as aforesaid on all of the aforesaid 4,000 cross-ties, amounting to the sum of $600, which is now justly due and owing unto the plaintiff as commissions on said cross-ties as aforesaid. Wherefore plaintiff prays and demands:

First, judgment against the defendant for the sum of $600 and the costs of this action.

Second, that a warrant of attachment be issued and directed to any sheriff or constable requiring him to attach and safely keep all the property of the defendant within the county of Clarendon, or so much thereof as may be sufficient to satisfy the plaintiff's demands, together with costs and expenses.

Third, for such other relief as may be proper.

...