Parks v. Blue Ridge Lumber Co, No. 13666.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtCARTER, Justice
Citation170 S.E. 156
PartiesPARKS. v. BLUE RIDGE LUMBER CO. et al.
Docket NumberNo. 13666.
Decision Date13 July 1933

170 S.E. 156

PARKS.
v.
BLUE RIDGE LUMBER CO. et al.

No. 13666.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

July 13, 1933.


Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Greenville County; G. Dewey Oxner, Judge.

Action by J. C. Parks against the Blue Ridge Lumber Company and others. From an order dismissing defendants' appeal from a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal.

Affirmed, and appeal dismissed.

Hicks & Johnston, of Greenville, for appellants.

J. D. Lanford, of Greenville, for respondent.

CARTER, Justice.

The plaintiff, J. C. Parks, commenced this action in the court of common pleas for Greenville county, February 26, 1932, against the defendants, Blue Ridge Lumber Company, a corporation, Paul C. Carr, and one Pontiac sedan automobile, South Carolina license No. C--3458, motor No. 407834, for damages for personal injuries alleged to have been received in an automobile wreck. Issues being joined, the case was tried before Judge J. Henry Johnson and a jury at the November, 1932, term of said court, resulting in a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $3,300. The case comes to this court on appeal from an order of his honor, Judge G. Dewey Ox ner. The facts and issues involved in the case are fully stated in the said order of Judge Oxner, which order reads as follows:

"This matter comes before me on motion of the plaintiff to dismiss the appeal of the defendant, upon the ground that the Notice of Intention to Appeal was served out of time, and that the motion would be based upon the record of the case.

"It appears that the case was tried on November 16, 1932, a verdict rendered for the plaintiff, for thirty-three hundred ($3,300.00) Dollars, and there appears upon the calendar in the hand write of his Honor, J. Henry Johnson, trial Judge, 'motion for N T noted' and mothing more. The Court adjourned sine die on December 10, 1932, without the Motion having been argued or without any disposition of the case otherwise. In fact it is stated by counsel for the plaintiff before me, and which is not controverted, that on the late afternoon of the 9th of December, 1932, he called the matter of the defendants' motion to the attention of Judge Johnson, in open court, defendants' counsel not being present, and to which the Judge replied that nothing further had been mentioned to him, and that the motion died with the rising of the Court.

"On December 15, 1932, judgment was entered up on the verdict, cost taxed by the Clerk, and on December 21, 1932, counsel for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Harlan v. Satterfield Const. Co., No. 19295
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • October 6, 1971
    ...of 1962, imposes the same requirement upon a motion for a new trial based upon trial error. Parks v. Blue Ridge Lumber Co., 170 S.C. 217, 170 S.E. 156 (1933); Altman v. Efird Bros. Co., 180 S.C. 205, 185 S.E. 543 (1936). Such motions when heard at the trial term may be decided afterward, Ca......
  • Gathings v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co, No. 13667.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • July 14, 1933
    ...reversed the holding and order of the said clerk and directed that judgment be entered in favor of the defendant for costs in the sum of[170 S.E. 156] $425.13, the amount of costs proposed by the defendant. The case now comes before this court on appeal from the said order of his honor, Jud......
  • Altman v. Efird Bros. Co, No. 14290.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 7, 1936
    ...the minutes, can only be heard at the same term at which the trial is had." In the case of Parks v. Blue Ridge Lumber Co., 170 S.C. 217, 170 S.E. 156, this is said: "It appears that the case was tried on November 16, 1932, a verdict rendered for the plaintiff, for thirty-three hundred ($3,3......
  • Fisher v. Teachey, No. 20413
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 2, 1977
    ...by Section 7-405 of the Code, her appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Parks v. Blue Ridge Lumber Co., 170 S.C. 217, 170 S.E. 156 (1933). Although the Court is without jurisdiction, we have reviewed the record and have determined that there would be no basis for overturnin......
4 cases
  • Harlan v. Satterfield Const. Co., No. 19295
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • October 6, 1971
    ...of 1962, imposes the same requirement upon a motion for a new trial based upon trial error. Parks v. Blue Ridge Lumber Co., 170 S.C. 217, 170 S.E. 156 (1933); Altman v. Efird Bros. Co., 180 S.C. 205, 185 S.E. 543 (1936). Such motions when heard at the trial term may be decided afterward, Ca......
  • Gathings v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co, No. 13667.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • July 14, 1933
    ...reversed the holding and order of the said clerk and directed that judgment be entered in favor of the defendant for costs in the sum of[170 S.E. 156] $425.13, the amount of costs proposed by the defendant. The case now comes before this court on appeal from the said order of his honor, Jud......
  • Altman v. Efird Bros. Co, No. 14290.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 7, 1936
    ...the minutes, can only be heard at the same term at which the trial is had." In the case of Parks v. Blue Ridge Lumber Co., 170 S.C. 217, 170 S.E. 156, this is said: "It appears that the case was tried on November 16, 1932, a verdict rendered for the plaintiff, for thirty-three hundred ($3,3......
  • Fisher v. Teachey, No. 20413
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 2, 1977
    ...by Section 7-405 of the Code, her appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Parks v. Blue Ridge Lumber Co., 170 S.C. 217, 170 S.E. 156 (1933). Although the Court is without jurisdiction, we have reviewed the record and have determined that there would be no basis for overturnin......

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