Bank of Columbia v. Gadsden
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Gage, J., Fairfield, November, 1898. Foreclosure by The Bank of Columbia against F. M. Gadsden. From Circuit decree, defendant appeals. cite: Plaintiff must “stand in shoes” of assignor: 38 S. C., 138; 43 S. C, 287; 45 S. C., 83; 49.S.
Read the full summary
Before Gage, J., Fairfield, November, 1898. Foreclosure by The Bank of Columbia against F. M. Gadsden. From Circuit decree, defendant appeals. cite: Plaintiff must “stand in shoes” of assignor: 38 S. C., 138; 43 S. C, 287; 45 S. C., 83; 49.S. C., 469; 50 S. C., 241. An express contract for indemnity may be executed when the surety assumes responsibility or afterwards, and is very elastic in construction: 4 DeS., 45; 15 S. C., no; 15 S. C., 5°5i 40 S. C., 22. Debt barred is good consideration for express promise: 13 S. C., 328. Notice of assignment, and burden of that proof, devolves on…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion, of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Jones.
This action was for foreclosure of a real estate mortgage, executed by defendant, Gadsden, to W. R. Doty & Co., March 12th, 1884, assigned by Doty & Co. to John C.'Gadsden, March 27th, 1896. Some time after maturitjr of the note which it secured, it was transferred by John C. Gadsden to the plaintiff bank, as collateral to secure a loan of money. Defendant set up as a spfecial defense: ‘‘I. That at the time of the assignment of the note and mortgage described in the complaint by John C. Gadsden to the plaintiff, the same was long…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Steele v. Atlantic Coast Line R. R.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1914
- Anderson v. ThomasSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
- Anderson v. PurvisSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1947
- Yancey v. StarkSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1925