Westlake v. Farrow

Citations

• 34 S.C. 270
• 13 S.E. 469
• 1891 S.C. LEXIS 50

Syllabus

<p>1. Dockets — Practice.—■A demurrer having been interposed to a complaint for the recovery of land, the cause was properly docketed on calendar 2 for trial by the court of the issue of law so raised, and the demurrer having been overruled and defendant given leave to answer, the cause was then properly transferred to calendar 1 for trial by jury.</p> <p>2. Jurisdiction. — The Court of Common Pleas has jurisdiction to entertain an action in which plaintiffs seek to recover land and in the same action to have partition of the land when recovered.</p> <p>3. Joinder oe Actions — Demurrer.—But as a matter of practice it is a question whether two such matters may be joined in the same action, but in this case only the cause of action for recovei-y of the land ivas well pleaded, and therefore a demurrer, for misjoinder was properly overruled.</p> <p>4. Ibid.' — Ibid.—When a complaint mixes up several allegations appropriate to two distinct causes of action, it seems that motion to make more definite or to strike out as surplusage is a better remedy in the first instance than demurrer.</p>