Smith v. Smith
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Fraser, J., Greenville, April, 1887. The note of Spillars is set forth in the opinion. So much of the mortgage as recited the debt was as follows: “Whereas I, the said William O. Yeargin, in and by one note, certain bond or obligation, bearing date the 23rd day of December, A. D. 1882, stand firmly held and bound unto A. Spillars, of said county and State aforesaid, in the penal sum of three hundred dollars, conditioned for the payment of the full and just sum of…
Read the full summary
Before Fraser, J., Greenville, April, 1887. The note of Spillars is set forth in the opinion. So much of the mortgage as recited the debt was as follows: “Whereas I, the said William O. Yeargin, in and by one note, certain bond or obligation, bearing date the 23rd day of December, A. D. 1882, stand firmly held and bound unto A. Spillars, of said county and State aforesaid, in the penal sum of three hundred dollars, conditioned for the payment of the full and just sum of three hundred dollars of same date herewith, with interest from this date thereof annually, as in and by the said bond and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice McGowan.
Baylis L. Smith, as the administrator of William C. Yeargin, deceased, instituted this action for the purpose of having lands of the intestate sold in aid of the personalty in paying debts and for partition. The heirs at law of the intestate were made parties, and also one Alexander Spillars, who held a mortgage of the lands of the intestate. An order was passed calling in the creditors to present and prove their demands' before the master, S. J. Douthit, Esq. Among the creditors who presented demands was the said Alexander…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Walton Plow Co. v. CampbellNebraska Supreme Court · 1892
- Edington v. McLeodSupreme Court of Kansas · 1912
- Fowler v. Barlow Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1929
- Platt v. CarrollSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1923