Tate v. Brazier
| Decision Date | 20 December 1920 |
| Docket Number | 10549. |
| Citation | 105 S.E. 413,115 S.C. 283 |
| Parties | TATE v. BRAZIER. |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Greenville County; J. W. De Vore, Judge.
Action by W. J. Tate against Lawrence Brazier and another. Judgment for the plaintiff, and the named defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Bonham & Price and T. E. Lagrone, all of Greenville, for appellant.
B. F. Perry, Jr., of Greenville, for respondent.
The plaintiff was injured by an automobile owned and operated by Wood. A few days afterwards Wood sold the automobile to Smith. Smith in turn sold it to the appellant for $750 cash.
Plaintiff was injured November 15, 1919. On January 30, 1920, he commenced suit for personal injury against Wood and Brazier, and attached automobile in Brazier's hand. Brazier, when he purchased the machine, had no notice of the injury of plaintiff by the machine when owned and operated by Wood. The plaintiff obtained a verdict for $600. There is no question of Wood's liability. He does not appeal. Brazier does, and raised one issue, as to whether or not the automobile was subject to attachment, levy, and sale under plaintiff's lien after the same had passed into the hands of an innocent third party without notice.
The exceptions cannot be sustained. The act of the Legislature is plain and specific, and gives the plaintiff a lien, and under the act plea of innocent purchaser cannot avail the appellant. This court has passed and construed that act in case of Merchants' & Planters' Bank v. Brigman, 106 S.C. 362, 91 S.E. 332, L. R. A. 1917E, 925.
The exception is overruled, and judgment affirmed.
GARY, C.J., and GAGE, J., absent on account of sickness.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hall v. Locke
... ... Bank v ... Brigman, 106 S.C. 362, 91 S.E. 332, L. R. A. 1917E, 925; ... In re McFadden, 112 S.C. 258, 99 S.E. 838; Tate ... v. Brazier, 115 S.C. 283, 105 S.E. 413 ... [118 ... S.C. 272] While it is true that the remedy provided by the ... ...
-
Rent-A-Car Co. v. Belford
... ... law. 2 R. C. L. 856." ... The ... nature of the lien was considered at some length in ... Parker-Harris Co. v. Tate, 135 Tenn. 509, 188 S.W ... 54, 56, L. R. A. 1916F, 935, wherein it was held that the ... lien created by the act of 1905 was not superior to the ... Merchants' & Planters' Bank v. Brigman, 106 ... S.C. 362, 91 S.E. 332, 333, L. R. A. 1917E, 925. In Tate ... v. Brazier, 115 S.C. 283, 105 S.E. 413, 414, the Supreme ... Court of that state said: "The act of the Legislature is ... plain and specific, and gives the ... ...
-
State v. Campbell
...innocent purchaser of the offending vehicle, and such machine may be attached in his hands in an action for the injuries ( Tate v. Brazier, 115 S.C. 283, 105 S.E. 413); the lien may be good even when the machine is used by some one else without the owner's consent (Denny v. Doe, 116 S.C. 30......
- State v. Buice