Case ID: sc_90/html/0288-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

8075
    STATE EX REL. LYON, ATTORNEY GENERAL, v. BRADY.
    1. Nuisance. — For the Court to exercise its discretion to dismiss a proceeding to enjoin the maintenance of a public nuisance on the ground that there has been a bona -fide abatement, there must be a satisfactory showing that the abatement is complete within the jurisdiction of the Court.
    2. Attorneys. — -Alleged verbal agreements between counsel will not be considered.
    Proceeding in tihe original jurisdiction ¡of this 'Court by Attorney General' J. Fraser Lyon against P. A. Brady, James Milton and State Agricultural and Mechanical Society to abate a nuisance of betting at ¡the raoes conlduoted at the society’s grounds when the proceeding was begun.
    
      Attorney General'J. Fraser Lyon, for the State.
    
      Messrs. Nelson, Nelson & Gettys, contra.
    
      January 5, 1912.
    
   Per Curiam.

Ini response to the order heretofore made by the Chief Justice requiring the defend)ants to show cause why they should not be enjoined from maintaining a public betting place alleged in the petition to be a public nuisance, the defendants have submitted preliminary returns' averring that the horse racing- upon which it was alleged the bets were made and all that pertained to. it had been discontinued and' that none of the acts complained of are now done at the fair grounds near the city of Columbia, the place where it was alleged the nuisance was maintained.

A party to a proceeding to enjoin- the, maintenance of a public n-uisanoe cannot arrest the proceedings by alleging merely that he no longer maintains the nuisance at the particular place mentioned ini the petition. For the Court to exercise its discretion to dismiss the proceedings on the ground that there has been a bona fide abatement by 'the party Charged, there must be a’satisfactory showing that the abatement is complete. The averments of discontinuance, except that of State Agricultural and Mechanical Society, are therefore insufficient in that they do not show that the acts alleged to constitute a nuisance are no longer done by the parties anywhere within the jurisdiction of the Court.

. The return of State Agricultural and Mechanical Society comes up to this, requirement.

The Court can taibe no cognizance of any alleged verbal agreement' between the Attorney General and counsel for defendants.

It is therefore -ordered that the proceedings be dismissed as against State Agricultural and Mechanical Society, upon its payment of the, costs incurred in the proceedings against it.

It is further ordered that -the 'Other defendants da present their final and cotpplete returns to. this -Court at ten, o’clock on Monday, January 8, 1912.