Mathis v. Hair
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Townsend, J., Barnwell, Fall term, 1918. Action by Sallie F. Mathis against J. W. Hair and others. Decree for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. ■ cite: As to the failure of plaintiff to show a prior agreement or intention which is not expressed in the deed, to convey a fee simple, fee conditional or other estate, which was left out of the deed by reason of a. mistake of law: 94 S. C. 349; 67 S. C. 280; 45 S. E. 164; 44 S. C. 22; 21 S. E. 973; 4 Rich.
Read the full summary
Before Townsend, J., Barnwell, Fall term, 1918. Action by Sallie F. Mathis against J. W. Hair and others. Decree for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. ■ cite: As to the failure of plaintiff to show a prior agreement or intention which is not expressed in the deed, to convey a fee simple, fee conditional or other estate, which was left out of the deed by reason of a. mistake of law: 94 S. C. 349; 67 S. C. 280; 45 S. E. 164; 44 S. C. 22; 21 S. E. 973; 4 Rich. Eq. 349. Cases distinguished: 85 S. C. 472; 95 S. C. 305; 106 S. C. 346. As to the plaintiff being a volunteer in the subject matter of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Fraser.
This is a proceeding to reform a deed. The word “heirs” is omitted from the habendum.
This case is so nearly like the case of Byrd v. O’Neal, 106 S. C. 346, 91 S. E. 293, that little discussion of it need be made.
1 Mr. E. E. Anderson came from Texas to South Carolina, a short time before the “War Between the Sections,” and married a daughter of Mr. Edwin Stansell. Mr. Anderson had some money and desired to buy a piece of land before he went to the war. Mr. Stansell, his father-in-law, undertook to help him and found that Mr. Allen…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Byrd v. O'NealSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1917