Court Opinion

ID: 9826388
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 15:52:21.689789+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:02.577481
License: Public Domain

On Petition For Rehearing
Mr. Justice Bonham :
An opinion of this Court in this case was filed April 27, 1935, by which the judgment of the Circuit Court was modified in this particular, viz.: The Circuit Court judgment included an item of $354.12 and interest thereon. The opinion of this Court affirmed the judgment of the lower Court, save in this particular, in regard to which it said: “We are of opinion that the respondent bank is not entitled to the inclusion of this item of $354.12, nor of interest thereon, in its judgment against the appellant bonding company.”
*369The judgment of the Court was in these words: “It is, therefore, the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be modified, as herein expressed, and in other respects it is affirmed.”
May 2, 1935, the respondent filed a petition for rehearing alleging, among other things, that: “That the Supreme Court in modifiying the judgment of the lower Court without granting the option of a new trial nisi to plaintiff overlooked that this is a law case in which the Court is without power to change the verdict of the jury without granting the party adversely affected thereby the option of a new trial nisi.”
In a per curiam order, the Court granted the petition and the case was heard on rehearing at the June, 1935, term of the Court. The Court is satisfied with the opinion heretofore filed except as to the disposition of the case made by the announcement of the judgment of the lower Court, to wit, that “the judgment of the Circuit Court be modified as herein expressed.”
The Court has no power to add to or reduce the amount found by the judgment of a lower Court without giving to the party adversely affected thereby the option of a new trial.
This question was lately fully considered and decided by this Court in the case of Anderson v. Ætna Casualty & Surety Co., 175 S. C., 254, 178 S. E., 819, 833.
Mr. Acting Associate Justice Ramage, in an able opinion on the rehearing, collated the authorities, and announced the unanimous opinion of this Court in these words : “Under the law, as above cited, and under the facts as developed in this case, we find that the Court has no power to increase the amount found by the lower Court.”
We may add that the same authorities show that this Court has no power to reduce the amount found by the Circuit Court.
*370The opinion heretofore filed is amended by striking out the language, “It is, therefore, the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be modified, as herein .expressed, and in other respects it be affirmed,” and inserting in lieu thereof the following: It is the judgment of this Court that a new trial is granted unless the respondent, within ten days after the remittitur is filed in the office of the Clerk of Court for Spartanburg County, shall enter on the record of the judgment in this case a remission of the sum of $354.12, and the interest allowed thereon. If such remission be entered, the judgment of the Circuit Court is in other respects affirmed.
Mr. Chiee Justice Stabler and Messrs. Justices Carter, Baker and Fisi-iburnE concur.