Case Name: Commissioners of the Roads for St. Paul's Parish vs. Lewis Morris
Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1846-01
Citations: 2 Rich. 320
Docket Number: 
Parties: Commissioners of the Roads for St. Paul’s Parish vs. Lewis Morris.
Judges: O’Neall, Evans, Butler and Wardlaw, JJ» concurred.
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 31
Pages: 320–321

Head Matter:
Commissioners of the Roads for St. Paul’s Parish vs. Lewis Morris.
The statute of limitations begins to run against a penalty for default of road duty, from the date of the default.
Before Frost, J. at Colleton, Spring Term, 1845.
Sum. Pro. to recover the amount of a fine imposed for default of road duty. The default occurred in 1840, and the penalty was adjudged by the Board at a sitting held the 17th April, 1844. The process was issued the 17th October following. The statute of limitations was pleaded. A decree was given for the plaintiffs, on the ground that the operation of the statute began from the time the fine was imposed by the Board, and not from the date of the default, and so the suit was commenced within six months after the cause of action accrued.
The defendant appealed, and now moved for a new trial, on the ground that the cause of action was barred by the statute of limitations.
DeSaussure, for the motion.
Edwards, contra.

Opinion:
Curia, per Frost, J.
This case was decided on the circuit, under an imperfect recollection of the case of the State vs. The Commissioners of New Town Cut, 2 Speers, 402, and the impression that that case supported the inference that the action for the recovery of the penalty for a default of road duty, accrued at the time the penalty was imposed by the Board of Commissioners. The case only decides that it is " immaterial whether the fine was imposed, or the execution issued, within six months or not, provided the proceeding for enforcing the penalty was commenced within that timeand that was done by giving notice to the defaulter, to appear before the Board, and answer for the default. No proof was offered in this case of the time when the defendant was notified to appear and answer for the alleged default, so as to avoid the plea of the statute, by shewing that the proceeding was commenced within the limited time, for the recovery of the penalty sued for. A new trial is therefore granted.
O'Neall, Evans, Butler and Wardlaw, JJ» concurred.