Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Docket Number 18577 Attorney(S) Messrs. Floyd Craig, Bill R. Craig and Robert G. Cawson, Jr., of Hartsville, for Appellant, cite: As to it being for the trial judge to refuse to strike the allegations of the complaint which attempted to set up a cause of action for breach of contract accompanied by a fraudulent act: 173 S.C. 131, 175 S.E. 73; 244 S.C. 411, 137 S.E.2d 412; 166 S.C. 454, 165 S.E. 203, 84 A.L.R. 1336; 228 S.C. 297, 89 S.E.2d 723; 215 S.C. 1, 53 S.E.2d 861; 207 S.C. 150, 35 S.E.2d 160. As to it being error for the trial judge to refuse to eliminate plaintiff's attorney fees as an element of damages from the complaint, when incurred defending a declaratory judgment proceeding to determine which of two insurers had liability coverage on the plaintiff: 385 P.2d 45 (Wash.); 198 F.2d 441; 200 A.2d 532 (N.J.); 161 So.2d 817 (Ala.); 131 So. 541 (Miss.); 11 S.E.2d 89 (Ga.); 216 S.W.2d 324 (Tenn.); 207 F.2d 588; 283 S.W.2d 245 (Tex.); 311 S.W.2d 41 (Mo.); 264 F.2d 883; 145 So.2d 422 (Ala.); 207 F. Supp. 437; 385 P.2d 45 (Wash.); 313 P.2d 178 (Cal.). Messrs. Thad E. Saleeby and Edward E. Saleeby, of Hartsville, and Isadore E. Lourie, of Columbia, for Respondent, cite: As to an action for breach of contract accompanied by a fraudulent act being ex contractu: 232 S.C. 397, 102 S.E.2d 360; 232 S.C. 433, 102 S.E.2d 743; 183 S.C. 9, 189 S.E. 809; 222 S.C. 492, 73 S.E.2d 688; 10 S.C.L.Q. 444, 463, et seq. As to Respondents expenses in the declaratory judgment action arising not from the provisions of the policy but from Appellant's refusal to comply with it: Appleman on Insurance, Sec. 4691; 29-A Am. Jur. 571, Insurance, Sec. 1460; 240 S.C. 75, 124 S.E.2d 602; 233 F. Supp. 64; 211 N.Y. Supp.2d 762; 25 C.J.S., Damages, Sec. 50 (3); 15 Am. Jur., Damages, Sec. 144; Restatement of Torts, Sec. 914. See more information ... Smart Summary Please sign up to generate summary. Margaret REGISTER, Respondent, v. NIAGARA FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY and JamesW. Cannon Insurance Agency, of whom Niagara Fire Insurance Company isAppellant. December 1, 1966. Per Curiam: This is an appeal from an order of the lower court denying a motion to strike certain allegations of the complaint as irrelevant, immaterial, and redundant. The general rule is well settled that an order refusing to strike allegations in a pleading as irrelevant and redundant is not conclusive upon the trial of the case on the merits and is not appealable. Sparks v. D.M. Dew Sons, Inc., 230 S.C. 507, 96 S.E.2d 488; Winchester v. United Insurance Co., 231 S.C. 288, 98 S.E.2d 530; Blackmon v. United Insurance Co., 233 S.C. 424, 105 S.E.2d 521; Tate v. Oxner, 236 S.C. 313, 114 S.E.2d 225; Mason v. Kresge, 247 S.C. 144, 146 S.E.2d 158. Application of the foregoing rule to the present appeal requires that it be dismissed; and it is so ordered. Appeal dismissed.