Grayson v. Harris
| Decision Date | 02 November 1892 |
| Citation | 16 S.E. 154,37 S.C. 606 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | GRAYSON. v. HARRIS. |
Frivolous Answer—Notice of Appeal.
1. An answer to a complaint alleging that defendant is indebted to plaintiff in the sum of $1,500, which denies that defendant "ever was indebted to the plaintiff in any sum whatever exceeding the sum of $80, " is frivolous, as stating no fact, but only a legal conclusion.
2. Where the notice of an appeal refers only to an order of the lower court, and not to its judgment, the judgment cannot be reviewed.
Appeal from common pleas circuit court of Beaufort county; W. H. Wallace, Judge.
Action by Mrs. E. J. Grayson against Rev. A. H. Harris to recover a sum of money. A motion for a judgment on the answer as frivolous was granted, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Tracy & Searson, for appellant.
W. J. Verdier, for respondent.
This was an action for money loaned by the plaintiff to the defendant, and was commenced by the service of a complaint and summons on the defendant. The complaint alleged that between January, 1889, and January 1, 1890, the plaintiff loaned to the defendant, as his request, at given times, and in various amounts, money, amounting in the aggregate to the sum of $1,500, which was demanded of the defendant, and payment refused. The complaint demanded judgment for $1,500 and costs. The answer was as follows: "The defendant, answering the complaint, denies that he ever was indebted to the plaintiff in any sum whatever exceeding the sum of eighty dollars. " Upon the filing of this answer, the plaintiff served notice of amotion for judgment on the answer as frivolous; and upon the hearing of that motion his honor, Judge Wallace, granted the following order: "A motion for judgment upon the answer served herein as frivolous having been made, upon due notice given, after hearing Mr. Verdier for the motion, and Messrs. S. J. Lee, Reynolds & Ezekiel, and Tracy & Searson in opposition, it is adjudged that the answerherein is frivolous, and that the plaintiff have judgment thereon in the sum of fifteen hundred dollars, and costs. " Upon this order, judgment was entered for $1,500 and costs against the defendant. Messrs. Tracy & Searson, for the defendant, served the following notice of intention to appeal: The same attorneys afterwards filed the following exceptions: "You will please take notice that the appellant herein, in pursuance of notice of intention to appeal heretofore served upon you, herewith submits his case for the supreme court, with exceptions to the order of his honor, Judge Wallace, dated September 18, 1891, and the judgment entered thereon September 24, 1891, excepting to such order: (1)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Badham v. Brabham
...this action, and is therefore frivolous. Tharin v. Seabrook, 6 S. C. 118; Machine Co. v. Hill, 3 S. E. 82, 27 S. C. 164; Grayson v. Harris, 37 S. C. 607, 16 S. E. 154. It is therefore ordered and adjudged that the answer of the defendant herein be, and hereby is, overruled, as frivolous, an......
-
Peacock, Hunt & West Co. v. Williams
...Co. v. Hill, 27 S.C. 164, 3 S.E. 82), or that upon mere inspection, without examination or research, it is utterly invalid (Grayson v. Harris, supra; Boyleston v. Crews, 2 S.C. 422; Cahoon Railroad Co., 10 Wis. 293). It is contended however, that the defendant, having contracted with the pl......
-
Manufacturers' Finance Co. v. Boyd
... ... 1, Code of ... 1922, for a judgment on the answer as frivolous. As was ... stated by this court in Grayson v. Harris, 37 S.C ... 606, 16 S.E. 154: ... "In such case the rule seems to be settled that to be ... adjudged frivolous the whole answer must be ... ...