Phillips v. Anthony
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Action in foreclosure by Wm. Phillips against Daniel Anthony, Thomas Spencer, R. D. Odom, Mrs. Rena Odom, C. P. Turner, and J. A. Carroll. The mortgage of defendants, Turner and Carroll, covered other lands than those covered by plaintiff’s mortgage, and they sought to have the other tract sold by same proceeding.
Read the full summary
Action in foreclosure by Wm. Phillips against Daniel Anthony, Thomas Spencer, R. D. Odom, Mrs. Rena Odom, C. P. Turner, and J. A. Carroll. The mortgage of defendants, Turner and Carroll, covered other lands than those covered by plaintiff’s mortgage, and they sought to have the other tract sold by same proceeding. The relief was granted them, and defendant, Anthony, appeals. cite in reply: 23 S. C., 208; Voorhies’ Code, 420; 2 Wait’s Prac., 478; 1 Hill Ch., 146; 24 S- C., 55; 36 S. C., 340; 28 S. C., 417; 42 S. C., 319. (Argument in chief has been mislaid.) cite: Code, 296; 23 S. C., 208; 24…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Jones.
The question in this case is, whether in a suit for foreclosure of a mortgage on one tract described in the complaint, a defendant, having a mortgage on that, and also on another tract, may have affirmative relief against his codefendant, the mortgagor, by a decree for the sale also of the tract not described in the complaint, and a judgment for deficiency. The facts out of which the question arose are as follows: Plaintiff brought suit to fore*461close a mortgage on a tract in Spartanburg County, executed by defendant, Anthony, to T. G.…
2Cited by9 opinions
- John Diebold & Sons' Stone Co. v. TattersonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1914
- United States Mortgage Co. v. MarquamOregon Supreme Court · 1902
- Wood v. SpeakmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Mills v. PopeMontana Supreme Court · 1931
- E. A. Beall Co. v. WestonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.