Huggins v. Watford

Citations

• 38 S.C. 504
• 17 S.E. 363
• 1893 S.C. LEXIS 89

Syllabus

<p>1. Non-Suit — Exception.—A motion for non-suit being based upon the pleadings and all of plaintiff’s testimony, an exception alleging- error in refusing the motion is sufficiently explicit, and is not obnoxious to the rule of court which forbids an exception by mere reference back to an exception at some pi-evious stage of the trial.</p> <p>'2. Ibid. — Variance.—Where plaintiff claimed by his complaint that the land in dispute had been turned over to him by B., the owner, until B. returned to the State, or if he never returned it was to become plaintiff’s property in fee, and that B. had never returned nor been heard from since 1865, and these allegations were testified to, except that in the event of B.’s non-return it was to become the property of plaintiff’s son, there was a fatal variance, and a non-suit should have been granted.</p> <p>3. Ibid. — Ibid.—Amendment.—Plaintiff, having failed to ask for any amendment to his complaint, cannot now claim to recover by reason of his marital rights, on testimony showing that plaintiff’s wife was B.’s sole heir at law.</p> <p>4. Exceptions — Abstract Questions. — This court having reached the conclusion, that a non-suit was improperly refused below, exceptions to the judge’s charge become abstract questions, which need not be considered.</p>