Livingston v. Exum

Citations

• 19 S.C. 223
• 1883 S.C. LEXIS 74

Syllabus

<p>1. A plaintiff having failed in his action for damages for trespass, alleged to have been committed by defendants on his lands, under subsequent proceedings to ascertain the damages to which the defendants were entitled under the injunction bond given by the plaintiff, he cannot raise the question of his title to such lands.</p> <p>2. L. obtained a preliminary injunction to restrain P. and E. from getting crude turpentine on lands which he claimed, and gave an injunction bond ; final judgment was rendered for defendants and the injunction was dissolved. E. was not engaged in getting crude turpentine, but P. was, and was under contract to furnish to E. for distillation all that he (P.) got. Held, that the loss to P. was sustained by reason of the injunction, but that the loss to E. was not the natural and proximate effect of the injunction, and, therefore, could not be recovered by him as damages. But the counsel fee paid by E. for procuring a dissolution of the injunction was properly recoverable under plaintiff’s bond.</p> <p>3. Counsel fees allowed by the master, assumed, in the absence of a contrary statement in the brief, to have been incurred by defendants in having the injunction dissolved; and such fees may be allowed as damages, recoverable under the injunction bond.</p> <p>4. Parties failing- to perfect their appeal taken from an order refusing to refer to the master their claim for damages under an injunction bond, are not entitled to a hearing of their appeal by this court when the cause is subsequently brought up by other appellants.</p>