Case ID: sc_107/html/0336-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Watts.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

9704
    McKENZIE ET AL. v. LONG ET AL.
    
    (92 S. E. 1032.)
    1. Trial — Statement's op Counsel. — Lawyers in a case are bound by any statement they make to the Judge who hears the case.
    2. Appeal and Error — Discretion—Presumptions.—In the absence of contrary showing in the record, it is presumed that lower Court exercises its discretion properly.
    Before SeasE, J., Hampton,
    October, 1916.
    Affirmed.
    Action by J. A. McKenzie and others against Leon A. Long and others-. From judgment for appellants, defendants appeal.
    Mr. J. W. Vincent, for appellants,
    submits: Order of survey desirable but not required: 32 S. C. 534; 11 S. E. 390; Code 1912, section 3538, and cases cited; 3 McC. 84; 1 Hill 380; Cheves R. 119; 5 Rich. R. 13; 2 Strob. R. 60; 10 Rich. R. 395.
    
      Mr. W. D. Connor, for respondents.
    June 29, 1917.
   The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

This is an appeal from an order of survey made by his Honor, Judge Sease, in an action for partition of certain lands described in the complaint in the case. The pleadings alone were before the Court when the motion was made. The defendants objected to the order asked for. We must assume that the lawyers in the case made some statement to the Court when the application was made and resisted.

Rawyers in a case are bound by any statement they make to the Judge who hears the case, and in the absence of anything that appears in the record before us we must assume that his Honor, in the wise exercise of the discretion vested in him, granted the order appealed from, and nothing shows to us that this discretion was erroneously exercised.

The appeal is dismissed.