From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morgan Austin v. Moorhead

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Dec 29, 1911
90 S.C. 278 (S.C. 1911)

Opinion

8071

December 29, 1911.

Before GAGE, J., Greenville, April, 1911. Affirmed.

Action by Morgan Austin against W.L. Moorhead. Defendant appeals.

Mr. Wm. G. Sirrine, for appellant, cites: Amendment came too late: 81 S.C. 574; 21 S.C. 221; 55 S.C. 90; 64 S.C. 491; 3 S.C. 411.

Mr. B.A. Morgan, contra, cites: Findings in law case will not be disturbed: 26 S.C. 304; 33 S.C. 359. Account may be proved by admissions: 27 S.C. 156; 86 S.C. 315. One receiving goods knowingly must pay for them: 46 S.C. 15.


December 29, 1911. The opinion of the Court was delivered by


This was an action for building material sold and delivered by plaintiffs to defendant. An order was made by consent referring issues of law and fact to the master, who found in favor of plaintiffs. Exceptions were taken to the master's report. Judge Gage confirmed the findings of the master, and gave judgment for plaintiffs in the sum of $223.90.

There being some testimony tending to establish the conclusions of fact by the Circuit Court, under the well settled rule in actions at law, we accept such conclusions as final.

From these findings it appears that defendant ratified the acts of J.A. Capell as agent in purchasing the materials from plaintiffs and having them charged in defendant's name, and that defendant promised to pay for same.

The only question of law presented to the Circuit Court was whether the master erred in allowing testimony to show a subsequent promise by defendant to pay the debts of Capell, as there was no allegation in the complaint that plaintiffs relied on such agreement. Under a complaint for goods sold and delivered by plaintiffs to defendant it was competent to show that defendant bought the goods through his agent, whose acts he ratified and for whose purchases he promised to pay. The appellant's contention that the debt sued on was the debt of Capell as an independent contractor is opposed to the facts as found by the master and Circuit Court.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.


Summaries of

Morgan Austin v. Moorhead

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Dec 29, 1911
90 S.C. 278 (S.C. 1911)
Case details for

Morgan Austin v. Moorhead

Case Details

Full title:MORGAN AUSTIN v. MOORHEAD

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Dec 29, 1911

Citations

90 S.C. 278 (S.C. 1911)
73 S.E. 189

Citing Cases

Windburn et al. v. Johnson et al

The claim for services in such case is on the law side of the Court. It will be observed that the trial Judge…

Sparks v. McCraw

Messrs. Butler Hall, for respondent, submit: Therewas a distinct issue of title to real estate, and a trial…