Skip to main content
· 3/24/1880

Arnold v. House

Citations

  • 12 S.C. 600
  • 1880 S.C. LEXIS 11

Syllabus

<p>1. A judgment which was valid in its origin, but fraudulently renewed for more than the balance remaining unpaid thereon, will be sustained for-the amount actually due.</p> <p>2. A purchaser at sheriff's sale is liable for interest from day of sale on so-much of his bid as is applicable to judgments not his own.</p> <p>3. The findings of fact by the Circuit Court will not be disturbed, unless the-evidence manifestly and plainly indicates a different result. †</p> <p>[Note by the Reporter. For the convenience of the profession, it is purposed to group together the decisions of this court since the adoption of the constitution of 1868, determining the power of the Supreme Court to review on appeal findings of fact by the courts below, and the rules which govern the exercise of such power.</p> <p>The chart of their powers is contained in Article IV., Section 4, of the constitution, which reads as follows: “ The Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction only in cases of chancery, .and shall constitute a court for the correction of errors at law, under such regulations as the general assembly may, by law, prescribe.”</p> <p>Mrst. Appeals from the Court of General Sessions, and from the common law side of the Court of Common Pleas, are governed by the same principles, so far as the jurisdiction of this court is concerned. In either case the verdict of a jury cannot 'be set aside on appeal for error of fact. This is fully supported by the authorities, and there is no case to the contrary. In the leading case of State v. Bailey, 1 S. C. 1, the authority of the former Court of Appeals in this state, and of the Court of King’s Bench in England, and of this court under the constitution of 1868, are considered, and the conclusion stated, that under Article IV., Section 4, of the present constitution, this court is without jurisdiction, and hence has no power to grant a new trial where it is asked upon the ground that the verdict is unsupported by the evidence that such

Judges: McIver, Thomson, Willard

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.