Duncan v. Bell
Supreme Court of South Carolina
This was a summary process, on a promissory note, given to plaintiff’s wife, as administratrix of James Ooit, for a horse bought at the sale of the estate of the said James Coit, made pursuant to an order of the Court of Ordinary. The cause was tried at Lancaster, Spring Term, 1819, before Mr. Justice Gantt. The defence was, that the horse was unsound at the time of the sale, of which unsoundness he died shortly after.
Read the full summary
This was a summary process, on a promissory note, given to plaintiff’s wife, as administratrix of James Ooit, for a horse bought at the sale of the estate of the said James Coit, made pursuant to an order of the Court of Ordinary. The cause was tried at Lancaster, Spring Term, 1819, before Mr. Justice Gantt. The defence was, that the horse was unsound at the time of the sale, of which unsoundness he died shortly after. It is unnecessary to detail the evidence on the part of the defendant. It is sufficient to state that it went to show the unsoundness of the horse at the time of the sale. But…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
ITott, J.
The doctrine of implied warranties has so long prevailed in this State,1 and has been so well illustrated by a series of uniform decisions, ever since the revolution, that no one thinks it now a subject of litigation. And it is not a question now submitted to us, whether a warranty of soundness of property may be inferred from soundness of price, but whether that rule of law is applicable to executors and administrators, and others acting in a representative capacity.
I formerly entertained an opinion that it did not apply to cases of that…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Latimer v. WhartonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1894