56 S.E.2d 321 (S.C. 1949), 16269, Southern Silica Min. & Mfg. Co. v. Hoefer

Citation: 56 S.E.2d 321, 215 S.C. 480

Opinion Judge: PER CURIAM.

Party Name: SOUTHERN SILICA MINING & MANUFACTURING CO. v. HOEFER.

Attorney: Messrs. David S. Mellichamp and Cooper & Gary, of Columbia, for Appellant, cite: As to the right of defendant to have complaint made more definite and certain: 25 S.C. 123; 81 S.C. 126, 62 S.E. 9; 51 S.C. 354, 62 S.E. 404. As to when two causes of action are blended together, the plaintiff should...

Case Date: Thursday October 27, 1949

Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

Linked as:

Document options

Printable page
Email this

Extract

56 S.E.2d 321 (S.C. 1949), 16269, Southern Silica Min. & Mfg. Co. v. Hoefer

No longer available (Autolink)

See the full content of this document

This document cites

South Carolina - 141 S.E. 705 (S.C. 1928), 12369, Rice v. City of Columbia
South Carolina - 161 S.E. 330 (S.C. 1931), 13274, Keenan v. Broad River Power Co.
South Carolina - 178 S.E. 869 (S.C. 1935), 14015, Hutto v. Wiggins
South Carolina - 179 S.E. 319 (S.C. 1935), 14031, Pope v. Goethe
South Carolina - 188 S.E. 496 (S.C. 1936), 14388, Witt v. Poole

See all quotations

56 S.E.2d 321 (S.C. 1949), 16269, Southern Silica Min. &amp; Mfg. Co. v. Hoefer

56 S.E.2d 321 (S.C. 1949), 16269, Southern Silica Min. & Mfg. Co. v. Hoefer