Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1908-04-21
DAMAGE SUIT INDUSTRY.
GreenviIe Lawyer Writes In Strong
Condemnation.
Editor Greenville News:

be llOurlSnlnS. III Is Well knoNI lllat
the circuit court is overwhelmed with
business. Cases are tried in the order
in which they are brought and now II
takes nearly year for a case to be
lreached and tried. a little over year
lago the bar of Greenville met to adopt
resolutions requesting the legislature
to create 4 county court for this coun-
Ity. to relieve the circuit court. At the
time. | made the point that the crowd
led condition of the circuit court was
due to nothing but the multitude OF
damage cases, the great majority OF
which have nothing in them, are
brought purely for speculation, by men
who have no property, and therefore,
nothing to fear from a judgment for
costs AS substitute for the county
lcOurt resolution, l offered a resolution
requesting the legislature to adopt an
act requiring the plaintiff in all dam
age cases. but in no other, to advance
the costs, or give security for them.
As the average man who tries to get
Ibis neighbOr's money with an empty
damage case would never bring the
case if he knew he would have to pay
the costs if he lost the case, such law
IwOuld cut down damage cases fully SO
per cent and completely relieve the tax
lpayers But it would ruin the busi-
mess of those lawyers who make liV-
ling out of damage cases. Not men,
Der of the bar present would second the
resolution, and there was considerable
resentment shown me for offering it.
have never seen but that l was
fright in the remedy / offered, and, as
lcvidcnce to sustain me, | want to show
the work of the term Of court just
ended here. Here are the cases tried:
/. McKittrick vs.. Greenville Trac-
ton CO. Damage case by It woman
passenger who alleged the car started
as she was leaving it, causing her to
fall.
2. Green VS.. Sanders. Partnership
dissolution.
8. Lewis VS. Cooley. Claim and de-
livery involving a chattel mortgage.
| 4. Robinson VS.. Southern Railway.
Damage suit by a passenger who al
LEGGED his finger was mashed in the car
door.
5. Segusta ct AL, VS.. WOOdside Mill.
Eight foreigners of the kind the state
immigration department is trying to
bring here in droves, were employed
/ ,nthnritinc of
Woodside found they were trying to
stir up trouble among the operatives,
and not only fired them but warned
other mills against them. They sued
for damages, alleging injury Of char
Iacter.
6. Alexander VS.. Carolina Mills.
Damage suit by operative whose hand
was hurt in machine.
| I. Brooks VS.. Brandon Mills. DAM
age suit for false Imprisonment by a
man who was arrested for entering the
mill without permission.
s. Palmetto Trust Co, VS.. Graham.
Rent contract.
O. Miller VS.. Telegraph Co. Dam
age suit for mental anguish caused
by delay in delivery of telegram an
nouncing death of brother.
TO- Cooley VS.. Jordan. Damage suit
for assault and battery-a fight.
II. Pearson vs.. Mills Mills. Suit for
penalty for not paying cash. This
was really a statutory case.
II. Griffith VS.. Southern Railway.
Damages demanded for collecting fare
twice.
13 Minis VS.. Telegraph Co. Dam
age suit by negro woman for mental
anguish caused by delay in delivery
of telegram announcing death Of
brother
IA. Graham vs.. Woodside Mill. Dam
age case by operative who fell and
broke arm while repairing machine.
1t will be seen that only three of the
cases tried were suits on contract, yet
the court was engaged with jury cases
two weeks. and did not finish its
work These three cases were matters
of business between business men, and
they took up not more than three
days, the rest of the time was taken up
trying damage cases, attempts to get
another mans money without working
for it.
Justice never was given for nothing.
Judges and officers of the law must
make living. and witnesses and ju-
rorS cannot afford to paE their eX-
penses travelling to the court and wait
ing in attendance on same. 1t may be
an entertaining dance, but somebody
must pay the fiddler Judgment for
costs is rendered against the man who
loses the case, and this is right, for the
man who is in the wrong ought TO pay
the cost of righting the wrong. But
nip. If q man has no property, he
cannot be made To pay a debt, and a
Judgment for cost is not different from
lany other debt. A damage case by a
Imam who is worth the amount of the
lcostS and can therefore be made to
pay the judgment for costs. is almost
unheard of Nearly every man who
brings a damage case is a man with no
property, and nothing to lose. The
case costs him nothing, for as a rule
damage cases are brought by lawyers
for q contingent fee. and there is no
legal work easier than Il damage case.
Neither the lawyer nor the client have
anything to lose. and, if by luck they
lShOuld win some damages. it is all clear
Igain. 4 worthless fellow who was go
ing to sue man with a little property
for damages was asked whether he
thought he would get anything. and
answered, "Oh, | don't know about
that. but you know it don't cost any
thing to law Il man." An older men,
ber of the bar once asked me why
had refused a damage case which he
knew had come to my office. l told
him | did not think there was anything
in il. and when | had told him the
facts he said: II think | would have
brought that case 1t is true. ii looks