Case ID: scl_12/html/0469-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Johnson\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

C. Clifton vs. Z. Phillips.
    la an action on the case in the nature of an action for ravishment of ward to try the freedom of a negro, where the jury found a verdict establishing the right of the plaintiff’s wardfto freedom, but found no damages, the Court Held that the plaintiff was entitled to costs.
    Tried at Richland, Fall Term, 1821, before Mr. Justice. Colcock.
    ri\ A HIS was an action on the case in nature of an action for ravishment of ward, to try the question whether a negro the ward of plaintiff, held in slavery by the defendant, was or tyas not entitled to his freedom. The jury found a verdict establishing the right of plaintiffs ward to freedom, but found no damages, and the question now submitted to the court is whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs ?
    Stark, for the motion.
    
      Clifton, contra.
   Mr. Justice Johnson

delivered the opinion of the court.

Costs were not allowed by the common law, and most of the acts giving them have fixed'the amount which the plaintiff must recover to entitle him to them ; and these limitations were obviously intended to discourage frivolous and paltry actions, and I think the court ought not to construe them too rigidly when the action (as in this case) was necessary to effect an important object. Applying therefore a liberal construction to the act on which this proceeding is founded, and which gives costs, it appears to me that the costs are not made to depend solely on the damages but on the verdict. The verdict in this case was for plaintiff, and under this construction I think him entitled to costs. . .

Justices Nott, Huger, Gantt and Jiichcu'dson, concurred.,