Garaty & Armstrong v. Dubose
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before COOKE, J., at Abbeville, January Term, 1874. Garaty & Armstrong were judgment creditors of Robert M. DuBose, and this was a rule against L. P. Guffin, Sheriff of the County, to show cause why he should not be attached for a contempt for failing to make and pay over the money on plaintiffs’ execution.
Read the full summary
Before COOKE, J., at Abbeville, January Term, 1874. Garaty & Armstrong were judgment creditors of Robert M. DuBose, and this was a rule against L. P. Guffin, Sheriff of the County, to show cause why he should not be attached for a contempt for failing to make and pay over the money on plaintiffs’ execution. The Sheriff made a return as follows : “ The respondent levied the execution and advertised the following property for sale on salesdayof January instant, viz: One tract of land, 810 acres, more or less, bounded by lands of -Cade,' F. Mitchell, S. S. Martin, and others — one wagon, four…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Moses, C. J.
If the claim to a homestead by the respondent, DuBose, was founded only on his interest-in the land of which he is the occupant, it would be enough to say that he does not hold it by any legal title, and only to such does the homestead provision apply. The Constitution (Art. II, Sec. 32,) expressly refers to the real estate of the head of a family, subject to sale “ under mesne or final process issued from any Court.” It presupposes a title, capable of transfer by such a sale. The respondent here has no legal title to the real estate. He is…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Lemmon v. McElroySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1920