Talbott & Sons v. Padgett

Citations

• 30 S.C. 167
• 8 S.E. 845
• 1889 S.C. LEXIS 84

Syllabus

<p>1. The necessity and requisites of exceptions stated. There being no exceptions in this case, the appeal was considered ex gratia, in the absence of objection by respondent.</p> <p>2. In action to recover possession of chattels after condition broken in a chattel mortgage or conditional sale, defendant interposed as a defence that he was entitled to an accounting for the amount due and to have the property sold and the surplus paid to him. Held, on oral demurrer by plaintiff, that these matters could not defeat plaintiff’s recovery, and, besides, were not facts, but mere legal conclusions.</p> <p>3. Defendant further alleged, by way of counter-claim, that plaintiff had failed to perform his covenants in the agreement sued on and demanded damages. Held, that the defence was not only insufficiently pleaded, but could not be interposed as a counter-claim to an action in claim and delivery.</p> <p>4. A plaintiff may orally demur to a counter-claim upon the ground that it is not sustained by the facts stated, after replying thereto.</p>