Case Name: O'DELL v. McELMURRAY ET AL.
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1918-06-22
Citations: 110 S.C. 80
Docket Number: 9977
Parties: O’DELL v. McELMURRAY ET AL.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 110
Pages: 80–81

Head Matter:
9977
O’DELL v. McELMURRAY ET AL.
(96 S. E. 255.)
Appeal and Ekbob.—Scope—Findings op Fact.—The Supreme Court will not reverse the Circuit C.ourt in its finding of fact where there is any evidence to sustain it.
Before Sease, J., Aiken, Fall term, 1917.
Affirmed.
Action by C. H. O’Dell against Robert McElmurray and others, as trustees of the Downer Institute. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.
Messrs. Hendersons, for appellants,
submit: An employee cannot recover for services actually rendered upon a quantum meruit where he without justification or excuse abandons the contract before the end of the term: 98 S. C. 25; 4th McCord 247; 80 S. C. 80; Wharton on Contracts, sec. 717; 30 Am. St. Rep. 55; 41 Am. St. Rep. 276; 34 N. J. Law 343; 115 U. S. 206.
Mr. J. P. Williams, for respondent,
submits: If there is any testimony to support the judgment of the Circuit Court, the finding of the Circuit Judge will stand: 104 S. C. 56; 93 S. C. 576. There may be a recovery for part performance of an entire contract, if complete performance has been prevented or waived by the party entitled to demand it: 78 Am. St. Rep. 520.
June 22, 1918.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Watts.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court where the Circuit Court upon appeal reversed the judgment of the magistrate's Court and rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
This Court will not reverse the Circuit Court in its finding of fact, where there is any evidence to sustain that finding. There is plenty of evidence in this case to take it out of the general rule as to not being allowed to sue for a quantum meruit for services actually performed under a contract when he quits the services without justification or excuse before the end of the term of service, as decided in Daly v. Jefferson Hotel Co., 98 S. C. 222, 82 S. E. 412.
Judgment affirmed.