Legal Opinion

Moyer v. Drummond

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided February 28, 1890PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Before Hudson, J., Spartanburg, April, 1889. This was a proceeding supplementary to execution instituted in May, 1888, by the judgment plaintiff in the case of J. Moyer against J. N. Drummond. The indebtedness was $144.80, with interest from March 23, 1888, and costs.

Read the full summary

Before Hudson, J., Spartanburg, April, 1889. This was a proceeding supplementary to execution instituted in May, 1888, by the judgment plaintiff in the case of J. Moyer against J. N. Drummond. The indebtedness was $144.80, with interest from March 23, 1888, and costs. The defendant was a member of a firm, whose net assets, after deducting indebtedness, amounted to $2,315.89, of which defendant’s share, less his account, was $438.75. Defendant, an unmarried man, and his unmarried invalid sister lived together. He claimed that his share of the net balance in the partnership was exempted from…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Mr. Justice McIver.

This was a proceeding to subject the interest of defendant in a certain partnership, of which he was a member, to the payment of a debt due by him to the plaintiff, under proceedings supplementary to an execution. Defendant claimed that his interest in said partnership did not amount to the sum of five hundred dollars, and was therefore exempt under the homestead laws of the State. The Circuit Judge held that the defendant was not entitled to the exemption claimed for two reasons: 1st. Because he was not the head of a family. 2nd.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Wade v. JonesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1854
  2. Calhoun v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1879
  3. Arnold v. WaltzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Cross v. BensonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1904
  2. Barkley v. International Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1955
  3. Fox v. Waterloo National BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
  4. Adams v. ChurchOregon Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Kaminski Hardware Co. v. Holden Trunk & Bag Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1929

11 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