Metts v. Charleston Theater Co.

• Decision Date: 30 June 1916
• Docket Number: 9417.
• Citation: 89 S.E. 389,105 S.C. 19
• Parties: METTS ET AL. v. CHARLESTON THEATER CO.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

89 S.E. 389

105 S.C. 19

METTS ET AL. v. CHARLESTON THEATER CO.

No. 9417.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

June 30, 1916

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Charleston County; Thos S. Sease, Judge.

Action by Annie A. Metts and another against the Charleston Theater Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Nathans & Sinkler, of Charleston, for appellant.

T. P Stoney and Bryan & Bryan, all of Charleston, for respondents.

FRASER J.

There is testimony that the plaintiff Mrs. Metts desired to attend and take with her four lady friends to a theatrical performance in the city of Charleston, called "Freckles." She called the office of the theater company to know when she could purchase the tickets. She was told that while the play, Freckles, was to be given Monday the tickets would be on sale on Friday. On Friday she could not go in person, but sent her friend, Miss Arnold, to purchase the tickets for her. Miss Arnold went to the office and called for the five tickets to Freckles, and paid for them. The tickets delivered to Miss Arnold were for five seats in the balcony in row D. It appears that there was a play on Saturday called "Spring Maid"; that the ticket seller by inadvertence gave to Miss Arnold the Spring Maid tickets instead of the tickets for Freckles. It was a simple act of inadvertence. A copy of the ticket is not in the "case," but it does appear that the tickets contained only the location of the seats and a performance number that showed only to the theater company for what play it was intended. That Mrs. Metts did not know and that there was no reasonable way for her to ascertain that a mistake had been made. Mrs. Metts found that one of her party would be late, and gave her one of the tickets, and Mrs. Metts and her three other friends went together to see Freckles. The tickets were accepted at the door, and the four coupons torn off and delivered to Mrs. Metts, who presented them to the usher. The usher escorted the party to row D, and pointed out or let down the seats. There were only three vacant seats. Three of the ladies took their seats and left one lady standing in the aisle. The usher immediately, or in a few minutes, inquired why one lady was standing, and was informed that, while five seats had been purchased, only three were available. One lady was without a seat, and another, expected soon, would be without a seat when she came. That the usher said there was some mistake, and he would investigate the matter. This he seems not to have done. Miss Arnold, who had conducted the actual purchase, was standing, and went to the ticket office and secured another seat for herself and one for the other lady, and these two seats pass out of the case. Mrs. Metts and her two friends continued to occupy their seats until the close of the first act, when Mr. Hilton, a policeman, with his wife and her sister produced tickets, calling for the seats occupied by Mrs. Metts and her two friends. The usher went to Mrs. Metts and demanded that she surrender her seats, as they were claimed by others. This Mrs. Metts declined to do. He went off, and then Mr. Hilton, in full uniform of a policeman, came up and demanded that she surrender these seats, as they had been assigned to others. There is nothing in the case to show that he revealed the fact that he and his party were the claimants. Mrs. Metts then got up and left. She claims that both the usher and the policeman were brusque and insulting in their manner, that the policeman...