From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Armstrong Pharmacy v. Rector, Sheriff

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Feb 8, 1929
149 S.C. 187 (S.C. 1929)

Opinion

12582

February 8, 1929.

In the original jurisdiction, Fall Term, 1928. Injunction granted.

Messrs. Price Poag, for petitioners.

Attorney General John M. Daniel, and Assistant Attorney Generals, Cordie Page, and J. Ivey Humphrey.


February 8, 1929. The opinion of the Court was delivered by


This case is controlled by the case of Xepapas et al., Petitioners, v. Richardson, Chief Constable, et al., Respondents. 146 S.E., 686, the opinion in which is filed herewith.

It is the judgment of this Court that the petitioners are entitled to an order of injunction restraining and enjoining the defendants from attempting to enforce the provisions of Sections 714 and 717 of the Criminal Code, as prayed for in their petition, and such order will issue.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WATTS and MR. JUSTICE STABLER concur.

MESSRS. JUSTICES COTHRAN and CARTER concur in result.


I am bound by the opinion of this Court in the recent case of Xepapas et al. v. Richardson, in which I did not concur.


Summaries of

Armstrong Pharmacy v. Rector, Sheriff

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Feb 8, 1929
149 S.C. 187 (S.C. 1929)
Case details for

Armstrong Pharmacy v. Rector, Sheriff

Case Details

Full title:ARMSTRONG PHARMACY ET AL. v. RECTOR, SHERIFF OF GREENVILLE COUNTY ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Feb 8, 1929

Citations

149 S.C. 187 (S.C. 1929)
146 S.E. 692

Citing Cases

Morison v. Rawlinson, Chief of Police

Legare Bates, for appellants, cite: Necessary parties: 118 S.C. 90; 110 S.E., 70; 26 U.S. 299. Nuisance: 72…

Harrison v. Williams

Messrs. Williams Henry, for appellants, cite: As tojudicial sale: 28 Cyc., 9; 151 S.C. 114; 25 S.C. 275; 50…