Case Name: JENNINGS ET AL. v. SAWYER, ET AL.
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1937-01-18
Citations: 182 S.C. 427
Docket Number: 14416
Parties: JENNINGS ET AL. v. SAWYER, ET AL.
Judges: Messrs. Justices Carter, Bonham, Baker and Fishburne concur.
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 182
Pages: 427–441

Head Matter:
14416
JENNINGS ET AL. v. SAWYER, ET AL.
(189 S. E., 743)
Messrs. Jennings & Jennings, Marion B. Jennings and John W. Jennings, for appellants,
Messrs. John M. Daniel, Attorney General, J. Ivey Humphrey and M. J. Hough, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondents,
January 18, 1937.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice Stabler.
On the hearing of the appeal in this case, counsel for appellants persuasively argued the two questions stated. We think, however, from a careful study of the entire matter, to which we have given much time and consideration, that the Circuit Judge, under the decisions cited by him, correctly answered and disposed of these questions, as well as all others raised in the Court below. Very little, if anything can be added to what he has said without the risk of unnecessary repetition. As we have held, the power of eminent domain resides in the state of right and by necessity, and the General Assembly may prescribe how this right should be exercised. The South Carolina State Highway Department is a department of the State government created for a special purpose, and a suit against it is "actually a suit against the State." Fann v. State Highway Department, 155 S. C., 219, 152 S. E., 429, 430. If any change in the procedure complained of by the appellants is desirable, the matter is one for the attention of the legislature.
The Circuit Court's decree, which will be reported, is affirmed.
Messrs. Justices Carter, Bonham, Baker and Fishburne concur.