From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Griffin v. Thayer

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Feb 5, 1919
111 S.C. 456 (S.C. 1919)

Opinion

10155

February 5, 1919.

Before SMITH, J., Colleton, Fall term, 1917. Affirmed.

Action by William Griffin against H.S. Thayer and others. From judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal.

Mr. M.P. Howell, for appellants.

Messrs. Padgett Moorer, for respondent, submit: That the defense of assumption of risk must be pleaded, and, not having been set up in the answer, defendants cannot now invoke it: 73 S.C. 511; 75 S.C. 68; 80 S.C. 7; 76 S.C. 452; 50 S.C. 53; 68 S.C. 514; 70 S.C. 470.


February 5, 1919. The opinion of the Court was delivered by


Little need be said of the facts in this case, as only two questions are raised in the argument. The other exceptions were abandoned at the hearing.

The plaintiff, an employee of the defendants, brought this action for damages for personal injuries. The trial Judge refused to submit to the jury the questions of assumption of risk and contributory negligence, inasmuch as assumption of risk and contributory negligence had not been pleaded. From these rulings this appeal is taken. Both are affirmative defenses and must be pleaded in order to be available defense. Neither was pleaded, and his Honor, Judge Smith, could not have submitted either.

The rule is so well settled that a review, or even a citation of authorities, is unnecessary.

The judgment is affirmed.

MESSRS. JUSTICE HYDRICK, WATTS and GAGE concur.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE GARY did not sit.


Summaries of

Griffin v. Thayer

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Feb 5, 1919
111 S.C. 456 (S.C. 1919)
Case details for

Griffin v. Thayer

Case Details

Full title:GRIFFIN v. THAYER ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Feb 5, 1919

Citations

111 S.C. 456 (S.C. 1919)
98 S.E. 201

Citing Cases

McKinney v. Woodside Cotton Mills

Action by A.J. McKinney against the Woodside Cotton Mills. From judgment of nonsuit, the plaintiff appeals.…