Legal Opinion

Vereen Ex Rel. Vereen v. Bell

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided June 9, 1971No. 19236PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bussey, Justice.

This is an action to rescind and cancel a deed to real estate on the ground of alleged mental incapacity of the grantor, John B. Vereen. Although tried below and argued here, without objection, as an action at law, it is clear that the case is one of equitable jurisdiction. Byrd v. King, 245 S. C. 247, 140 S. E. (2d) 158; Mills v. Little, 158 S. C. 17, 155 S. E. 148; Shute v. Shute, 79 S. C. 420, 60 S. E. 961; Sims v. McClure, 8 Rich. Eq. 286; 12 C. J. S. Cancellation of Intsruments § 2, p. 943; 13 Am. Jur. (2d) 497, Cancellation of Instruments, Sec. 2; also 13 Am. Jur. (2d)…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Byrd v. KingSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1965
  2. Mills v. LittleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1930
  3. Britton v. AmosSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1962
  4. Shute v. ShuteSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1908

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Smith Companies of Greenville, Inc. v. HayesCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993
  2. Atkinson v. BelserSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1979
  3. In Re ThamesCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2001
  4. Wright v. PatrickSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1974
  5. Ballenger v. City of InmanCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1999

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API