Jefferies v. Harvey

• Decision Date: 30 March 1945
• Docket Number: 15727.
• Parties: JEFFERIES v. HARVEY et al.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

33 S.E.2d 513

206 S.C. 245

JEFFERIES v. HARVEY et al.

No. 15727.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

March 30, 1945

J. H. Hall and C. E. Saint-Amand, both of Gaffney for appellants.

Dobson & Dobson, of Gaffney, and Barron & Barron, of Union for respondent.

FISHBURNE Justice.

This appeal is from an order passed by the lower court ordering a compulsory reference to a special referee to hear and determine all issues of law and fact.

The action was brought on twenty-seven promissory notes, alleged to have been executed and delivered to the plaintiff by the defendant, Poole Harvey, and endorsed prior to delivery by the defendant, B W. Humphries. All the notes are in the same form and bear interest at the same rate, but vary as to dates of execution, amounts, and maturity dates. They cover a period of two years, the first note being dated September 2, 1936, and the last note bearing date August 29, 1938. The twenty-seven notes, without interest added, aggregate the sum of $3,665.

The defenants in their separate answers denied the complaint, and in addition pleaded several defenses, presenting the issues of payment, breach of trust, fraud, deceit and usury.

It appears that the defendant, Poole Harvey, was county auditor of Cherokee County. He alleges that he borrowed various sums of money from the plaintiff, over a period of years, executed notes therefor, and in order to secure them assigned and delivered numerous salary vouchers, state and county, to the plaintiff; that these salary vouchers were given to the plaintiff upon his agreement to collect them and apply the proceeds to the payment of the notes. The allegation is made that the plaintiff was entrusted with the collection of the salary vouchers, but that he breached his trust by failing to give the defendant, Harvey, any credit therefor, or to furnish him with any statement of the moneys collected. It is further alleged that the plaintiff has collected from his salary vouchers more than enough to pay the amounts due on the various notes, but that in violation of his trust he has refused and neglected to apply these collections as credits on the notes secured by the vouchers, or make any accounting therefor.

Upon joinder of issue, the plaintiff moved the court upon the pleadings and proceedings and upon affidavits, for an order of reference, which after a full hearing was granted. The order was rested upon the ground that the pleadings and other papers exhibited to the court showed that a trial of the issues would involve 'an accounting so long and intricate as that it would be impracticable to try the case before a jury; that the said accounting would be so complicated and intricate that an ordinary jury could not comprehend and decide the issues correctly, and supplies the essential feature of equitable cognizance justifying me, in my discretion, to order a compulsory reference.'

In addition to the pleadings and affidavits of the plaintiff and his attorney, submitted to the lower court, there was also presented two notices served by defendants' attorneys to produce twenty-seven checks of various dates, delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant, Harvey, and drawn on the Merchants and Planters National Bank of Gaffney, together with all letters received by the plaintiff from the Comptroller General of South Carolina dated December 15, 1934, or any date subsequent thereto. In another notice the plaintiff was directed to produce further correspondence with the Comptroller General, and all agreements entered into by and between the plaintiff, the defendant Harvey and the Merchants and Planters National Bank, dated December 15, 1934 and thereafter; or by and between the plaintiff and Merchants and Planters National Bank, dated December 15, 1934, or thereafter, regarding the collection of salary vouchers of the defendant Harvey, as county auditor for Cherokee County, or regarding the payment thereof by the State Treasurer.

In addition to the foregoing, the plaintiff was noticed to produce all deposit tickets or bank statements, letters or correspondence between the designated bank and the plaintiff concerning the collection of salary vouchers of the defendant Harvey, by the plaintiff, and the credit or payment thereof to the plaintiff, whether the same be by voucher, check or otherwise, dated December 15, 1934, or subsequent thereto.

In passing upon the motion, the Circuit Court not only had these notices before it demanding the production by the plaintiff of the numerous records, papers, and documents referred to but there was also submitted by the plaintiff for the consideration of the court the cancelled checks, vouchers and notes referred to in plaintiff's affidavits. And it is admitted that these papers alone make a large and voluminous record. It is manifest that the course of dealing between the parties involved scores of transactions, extending back to the year 1934, and even prior thereto, all of which possess some relevant relationship to the...