Case Name: STUART v. LIBERTY LIFE INS. CO.
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1923-06-18
Citations: 122 S.C. 357
Docket Number: 11110
Parties: STUART v. LIBERTY LIFE INS. CO.
Judges: Mr. Chief Justice Gary and Mr. Justice Watts concur.
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 122
Pages: 357–358

Head Matter:
11110
STUART v. LIBERTY LIFE INS. CO.
(115 S. E., 638)
Appeal and Error — Where Sole Question is One Fact, Appeal Will be Dismissed. — Where in a suit on an insurance policy the sole question was whether plaintiff filed her claim while the policy was in force, and had paid all premiums, an appeal from Circuit Court on affirmance of judgment of magistrate will be dismissed; the Supreme Court having no jurisdiction, since the question is one of fact only.
Before Shipp, J., Clarendon, 1922.
Affirmed
Action by Emma Stuart against the Liberty Life Insurance Company. A judgment for plaintiff in the Magistrate’s Court was affirmed on appeal to the Circuit Court, and defendant appeals. Appeal dismissed.
Mr. Harold C. Curtis, for appellant,
cites: Insurance company has right to make reasonable rule as to payment of premiums: 90 S. C., 168.
Mr. J. J. Cantey for respondent.
June 18, 1923.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Eraser.
This action was commenced in a Magistrate's Court, on a policy of insurance, and is for failure to pay sick benefits. The judgment is for the plaintiff. The defendant appealed to the Circuit Court. Judge Shipp affirmed the Magistrate's judgment, with the following order:
"Upon considering the appeal herein, and it appearing that the. plaintiff testified she duly filed her claim for sick benefit while the policy was of force and effect, and had paid all premiums until the company refused to pay her claim, it seems to me that'there is evidence to support the verdict, and it is, therefore, ordered, that the judgment of the Magistrate be, and the same is hereby, affirmed. I see nothing in the record to support the claim that the jury was not drawn according to law.
"The judgment is affirmed.
"S. W. G. Shipp, Presiding Judge.''
It is clear that the question is one of fact and this Court has no jurisdiction to determine the facts.
The appeal is dismissed.
Mr. Chief Justice Gary and Mr. Justice Watts concur.
Mr. Justices Cothran and Marion concur in the result.