Tederall v. Bouknight
Supreme Court of South Carolina
The facts of this case are stated in the opinion of the court. The Circuit decree was as follows: There can be no doubt that when infants are properly made parties, they are bound by the judgment or decree in such cause, and cannot impeach it collaterally. They are, however, not bound by proceedings in which they have not been properly made parties.
Read the full summary
The facts of this case are stated in the opinion of the court. The Circuit decree was as follows: There can be no doubt that when infants are properly made parties, they are bound by the judgment or decree in such cause, and cannot impeach it collaterally. They are, however, not bound by proceedings in which they have not been properly made parties. Was plaintiff properly made a party to the proceedings before the Probate Court for partition ? In the case of Finley v. Robertson (17 S. 0., 435) the court say : “A due and tender regard for the rights and welfare of infants requires that the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Me. JUSTICE McGowaN.
Many years ago (1826) William Stewart, of Edgefield County, died, leaving a will, by which he gave a tract of land in said county, containing 130 acres, more or less, to his brothers and sisters, among whom was his sister Desdemona (Desdemony), who was never married, but having an illegitimate son, William Mastin Stewart. She conveyed her interest in the said land to him, and in 1873 he died intestate, leaving as his sole heir at law one child, Mary Stewart, then under thirteen years of age. The said Mary afterwards intermarried…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People v. HollowayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dixon v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1961