Legal Opinion · Dissent

Neely v. Love

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided March 9, 1928No. 12393Published

1DissentJustice Coti-iran

(dissenting) : I do not agree with the conclusion announced in the opinion of Mr. Justice Carter, and respectfully submit herewith the grounds of my dissent.

This is an action to foreclose a mortgage given by one E. P. Love to J. S. Brice, attorney, to secure a note for $2,000.00, in which the plaintiff claims an interest to the' extent of $1,200 by virtue of a written assignment by Brice to her. The defendants, purchasers of the mortgaged premises, claim that the amount due upon the mortgage has been paid in full to J. S. Brice, attorney, including the plaintiff’s $1,200 interest; that in…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Robb v. VosSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Bayne v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  3. Luther v. WheelerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1905
  4. Winkler v. JerrueCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
  5. Rhodes & Son Furniture Co. v. JenkinsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907

26 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