Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

47 S.C.L. 42

Beadenbaugh v. Cooper

Court of Appeals of South Carolina · decided 1860-05-15

BEFORE WITHERS, J„ AT UNION, FALL TERM, 1859. The report of his Honor, the presiding Judge, is as follows: “It is difficult to report this case in such order as would conform to the grounds of appeal, and therefore I will give it at large. “It was stated to be an action to recover a sum o£ money, paid by mistake by the plaintiff to the defendant.

Decided 1860-05-15

¶1The opinion of the Court was delivered by

O’Neall, C. J.

¶2The ground in arrest of judgment cannot avail the defendant. The counts for work and labor, goods sold, money lent, and money had and received, are beyond all doubt good, and that for money had and received entitled the plaintiff to recover, if it was true, as he alleged, that the defendant had been paid by Jeff. Nance for the same matter, before he compelled the defendant to pay it. It may be that the declaration is not sufficient in counting upon the alleged mistake in a settlement, on account of Mrs. John Beadenbaugh.” But that is immaterial, as the count for money had and received covers the same matter. It was not necessary, as the first ground supposes, to allege or prove that the plaintiff had “ notified the defendant of the supposed error, and had demanded the money.” To show that he had been twice paid, entitled the plaintiff to recover.

¶3The various grounds for new trial have not shown any clear error in the verdict: according to well-established rules we cannot interfere. The motions in arrest of judgment and for a new trial are dismissed.

Johnstone and Wardlaw, JJ., concurred.

¶4Moiipn dismissed.

/47/scl/42 · .json · Public domain