Snelling v. Lamar
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Wallace, J., Aiken, April, 1889. The Circuit decree in this case, omitting the statement of facts, was as follows: The question in the case is whether the interest of the plaintiff has been destroyed by the deed of feoffment supra.
Read the full summary
Before Wallace, J., Aiken, April, 1889. The Circuit decree in this case, omitting the statement of facts, was as follows: The question in the case is whether the interest of the plaintiff has been destroyed by the deed of feoffment supra. That Catharine Holley took an estate in the trust property for and during the joint lives of herself and husband, there can be no question, nor can there be any question that the legal title to the land remained in the trustees during the joint lives of Wade and Catharine. Any further interest of Catharine Holley, after the first estate should be determined,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice McIyer.
The plaintiffs brought this action to *74recover possession of an undivided interest in a tract of land now in possession of defendants: The facts out of which the controversy arises are not disputed, and may be stated, substantially, as follows: On the 16th of January, 1843, one Charles Holley conveyed the land now in question, together with other property, to certain trustees, in trust for the sole and separate use of Catliarine 'Holley, the wife of Wade Holley, “for and during the joint lives of her, the said Catharine Holley, and…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Dobson v. SmithSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1948
- Linder v. Nicholson Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1933
- Joyce v. BodeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1906
- Black v. HarmanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1923
- Burkhalter v. BreedenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.