Case Name: Joseph Smith vs. James Hunt
Court: Constitutional Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1821-11
Citations: 1 McCord 464
Docket Number: 
Parties: Joseph Smith vs. James Hunt.
Judges: justices Huger, Colcock and Nott, concurred.
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 12
Pages: 464–464

Head Matter:
Joseph Smith vs. James Hunt.
A Sheriff must be proceeded against by process, as other persons, íá order to make him a party in court.
Tried at Spartanburgh, Fall Term, 1821, before Mr, Justice, Ganii.
The plaintiff hacl sued out a writ against the defendant, tvho then was and still is the sheriff of Spariatiburgh district, and this was an application to the court for -leave to fde his declaration after the lapse of more than a year and day from the time the writ whs lodged in the coroners office, which was rejected i arid the application was now renewed in the form of an appeal from that decision, on the. ground, that the defendant, being an officer of court, and consequently in contemplation of law always in court, the plaintiff hada right to file his declaration at any time without process to bring him in. •
Farnandis, for the motion.
S. Foster, conlfa.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice "Johnson
delivered the opinion of the court.
It is said, and I believe on good authority, that this application is in accordance with the practice of the English courts. The answer is that the practice in this state has been invariably and immemorially to make an officer of court a party by process. I have not seen nor do I believe that an)'' inconvenience has ¿resulted from it, and do not therefore think that it ought to be abandoned for another, although it might be equally practicable and convenient.
The motion is refused.
justices Huger, Colcock and Nott, concurred.