Court Opinion

ID: 9826282
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 15:42:54.734112+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:41:57.899979
License: Public Domain

Mr. Chief Justice McIver.
I dissent upon two grounds. ist. Because I think the rule of law applicable to this case as laid down by the Circuit Judge i's correct. 2d. Even if it is not, because of its failure to include other limitations than those stated by the Circuit Judge, then it was the duty of the appellants to submit a request to charge such other limitations, and this they failed to do. The well settled doctrine of this Court being, as I understand it, that if a party desires a more extended charge than that delivered on a given point, he must submit a request to that effect. See State v. Kendall, 54 S. C., 192.
Mr. Justice Pope. I dissent. The Circuit Judge stated the correct rule.