Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

9 S.C.L. 344

M'Daniel v. Nicholson

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 15, 1818

Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 1818-05-15

The plaintiff had brought a sum. pro. against the defendant, but, living out of the state, had been ordered to give security for costs. In the course of the trial it appeared, that the plaintiff was a minor, whereon he was ordered to be non-suit, not having sued by prochcin ande, or guardian, nor having offered any person to become his guardian in this stage of the trial.

Decided 1818-05-15

¶1The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Grimke.

¶2The motion, when made in the Circuit Court, was to the discretion of the presiding J udge, and I considered, that as the plaintiff knew he was not of age when he brought his action, he should not obtain, by returning into the state, a discharge of the order, by which he was bound to give security for costs, especially as he had not substituted any one to be his guardian, and who would be responsible for the same. It is true that a minor may commence an action, but he *345cannot file his declaration, until he has some person appointed his prochain amie, or guardian; - . , .f.. . he did not do so, and went on to trial, he must be nonsuit, whatever were the merits of the In the present case of a sum. pro. he ought, at least, to have got some person appointed to act for him in that character, before the trial came on; but as he has not done so, his security must take the consequences.

¶3I am of opinion, therefore, that the motion ought to be discharged.

Colcoch and Cheves, J. concurred.
/9/scl/344 · .json · Public domain