Ryder v. Jefferson Hotel Co.
South Carolina Supreme Court
113 S.E. 474 (S.C. 1922)
Charles and Edith Ryder (plaintiffs), husband and wife, were staying at a hotel owned by Jefferson Hotel Company (Jefferson) (defendant). In the middle of the night, a servant employed by Jefferson woke the Ryders up and insulted the couple. Specifically, the servant alleged that the Ryders were not actually husband and wife. As a result of this, the Ryders had to find a new place to stay in the middle of the night, allegedly at great expense to their credit, reputations, and business. The Ryders jointly brought a tort claim against Jefferson. Jefferson demurred to the complaint on the grounds that Charles and Edith Ryder had separate causes of action and their claims should not be joined. The circuit court overruled the demurrer. Jefferson appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Marion, J.)
Dissent (Fraser, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.