Jordan v. Neece
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Kershaw, J., Aiken, November, 1889. This was an action by John Jordan against Idella L. Neece and John A. Neece, commenced July 10, 1888. The Circuit decree, omitting its statement of the facts, was as follows : As matter of law, I find that plaintiff has misconceived his interest under said deeds.
Read the full summary
Before Kershaw, J., Aiken, November, 1889. This was an action by John Jordan against Idella L. Neece and John A. Neece, commenced July 10, 1888. The Circuit decree, omitting its statement of the facts, was as follows : As matter of law, I find that plaintiff has misconceived his interest under said deeds. They were not conveyances of the land, but merely covenants to stand seized of the same to the use, and for the purposes, of the copartnership so long as it should continue, and no longer. From the nature of the copartnership, as developed by the proof, it was without limit as to time, and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice McIver.
The plaintiff' and his mother-in-law, Mrs. Catherine A. McGrew, being the owners of adjacent tracts of land, separated by the waters of Dean Swamp, on the first day of October, 1869, Mrs. McGrew executed a paper under her hand and seal, in the presence of two subscribing witnesses, of which the following is a copy “Know all men by these presents, that I, Catherine A. McGrew, * * * for the love and affection I have and bear to my son-in-law, John Jordan, * * * do give and release unto him so much land at, along, belpw, and above…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Simpson v. BrownSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
- Windham v. HowellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1907
- Crawford v. Atlantic Coast Lumber Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1908
- McMillan v. HughesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1911
- Grainger v. HamiltonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1955
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.