Pollock v. Pegues
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Aldrich, J., Chesterfield, January, 1905. Action by Carrie E. Pollock, W. P. Pollock, M. H. Stacey and E. E. Stacey against James W. Pegues.
Read the full summary
Before Aldrich, J., Chesterfield, January, 1905. Action by Carrie E. Pollock, W. P. Pollock, M. H. Stacey and E. E. Stacey against James W. Pegues. The cause was referred to R. T. Caston, who made the following report: “It appears that the plaintiff, W. P. Pollock, acting as ag-ent and attorney in fact for the plaintiff, Carrie E. Pollock, who is his sister, and by whom he was given such authority, had in his charge 400 acres of land, fully described in complaint, which was owned by her. “In the early part of year 1902 he made for her a contract and agreement with the defendant, James W.…
1ConcurrenceJustice Woods
I concur in the conclusion that the defendant was estopped from claiming any interest in this land against the plaintiffs, M. H. Stacy and P. E. Stacy, by his agreement communicated to them under authority from him and upon which they acted in purchasing, that he would claim no interest in the land, and would look to W. P. Pollock, Esq., for compensation. Moore v. Trimmier, 33 S. C., 535; 11 S. E., 548; Shuford v. Shingler, 30 S. C., 612; 8 S. E., 799; Williamson v. Jones, 4 Am. & Eng. Dec. in Equity, 399, notes 34, 35 and 36.
Mr Justice Jones concurs in the result.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Moore v. TrimmierSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1890
- Shuford v. ShinglerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1889