Garlington v. Copeland
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Hudson, J., Laurens, March, 1889. ’ In this case, the Chief Justice, having been of counsel for some of the parties in the cause, declined to sit. The appeal was argued before the two Associate Justices in May, 1889. In November, 1889, they filed an order directing a reargument.
Read the full summary
Before Hudson, J., Laurens, March, 1889. ’ In this case, the Chief Justice, having been of counsel for some of the parties in the cause, declined to sit. The appeal was argued before the two Associate Justices in May, 1889. In November, 1889, they filed an order directing a reargument. The Hon. J. J. Norton was then appointed to sit in the place made vacant by reason of the disqualification of the Chief Justice, and reargument was had before the court thus made full on January 9,1890. This was an action by Mary Y. Garlington and George F. Young against George P. Copeland for the recovery of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Norton.'
Under proceedings for the partition of the real estate of one W. R. Young, who died in 1868, instituted in the former Court of Equity, a tract of land containing 550 acres, originally known as the “Duncan tract,” but subsequently designated in the litigation between these parties as the “W. R. Young tract,” was bid off by one Dean, who, refusing to comply with the terms of the sale, transferred his bid to Campbell, the commissioner in equity, who made the sale, who in turn transferred this bid to one Samuel Young, who went into…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Eagerton v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1935
- Young, Receiver v. Peoples BankSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1931
- State v. StartSupreme Court of Kansas · 1900
- Outlaw v. BarnesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1921
- Hicks v. GilesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1962