From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. S.A.L. Ry. Co.

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Sep 3, 1917
108 S.C. 130 (S.C. 1917)

Opinion

9797

September 3, 1917.

Before SEASE, J., Lexington, February, 1916. Affirmed.

Action by T.L. Martin against the Seaboard Air Line Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Messrs. Lyles Lyles, for appellant, cite: As to interest of mortgagor in chattel after condition broken: 44 S.C. 315; 51 S.C. 315.

Messrs. Melton Sturkie, Thurmond, Timmerman Callison and A.D. Martin, for respondent, cite: 7 Cyc. 18; 105 S.C. 140; 37 S.C. 562; 14 A. E. Ann. Cas. 634; 2 Bail. 466; 70 S.C. 329; 60 S.C. 109; 28 A. E. Enc. of I., 666; Jones Mortgages 447; 85 S.C. 346, 347.


September 3, 1917. The opinion of the Court was delivered by


Defendant appealed from judgment for plaintiff for negligent injury to plaintiff's automobile.

The exceptions present two assignments of error:

1. That the Court erred in refusing to direct the verdict for defendant, on the ground that plaintiff had no title to the automobile, because he had given a mortgage on it which was past due and unpaid. That defense was properly overruled on the authority of Wilkes v. Railway, 85 S.C. 346, 67 S.E. 292, 137 Am. St. Rep. 890, 21 Ann. Cas. 79. See, also, the editorial note to that case, and 11 C.J. 598. Defendant knew of the mortgage, and, under the case cited, could have protected itself against another action by the mortgagee by having him made a party to this action.

2. That the Court charged on the facts in referring to the automobile as plaintiff's property. The right of plaintiff was not a question of fact. As matter of law, under the case cited, he had such property right in the automobile as entitled him to maintain the action.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Martin v. S.A.L. Ry. Co.

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Sep 3, 1917
108 S.C. 130 (S.C. 1917)
Case details for

Martin v. S.A.L. Ry. Co.

Case Details

Full title:MARTIN v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RY. CO

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Sep 3, 1917

Citations

108 S.C. 130 (S.C. 1917)
93 S.E. 336

Citing Cases

Strom v. Payne

The Judge cannot adopt language of counsel if on thefacts: 14 R.C.L., 42, 773. Expression of opinion…

McCullough v. Goodrich

This wide selection of remedies available to a secured creditor, in our view, counsels strongly against the…