M'Dowall v. Branham
Supreme Court of South Carolina
This was an action of debt on judgment of assets, guando acciderint, against Sophonisba E. M. Wingate, now Branham, and Joseph Wingate, administrator and administratrix of Edward Wingate, deceased, taken and signed upon the 26th April, 1810, upon a note given by Edward Wingate, deceased, after his intermarriage with Sophonisba E. M. Wingate, dated the 27th of February, 1807. The negroes, Hannah, Bob, Bam, John, Rachel, Paul, and Nancy, (children of Hannah,) Mahata and Jack,…
Read the full summary
This was an action of debt on judgment of assets, guando acciderint, against Sophonisba E. M. Wingate, now Branham, and Joseph Wingate, administrator and administratrix of Edward Wingate, deceased, taken and signed upon the 26th April, 1810, upon a note given by Edward Wingate, deceased, after his intermarriage with Sophonisba E. M. Wingate, dated the 27th of February, 1807. The negroes, Hannah, Bob, Bam, John, Rachel, Paul, and Nancy, (children of Hannah,) Mahata and Jack, came by or belonged to Sophonisba E. M. Wingate, and were in the possession of Edward Wingate, deceased, from the time…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
G-antt, J.
The facts in this case are admitted by the counsel, and the law of the case, in my opinion, is very clear and conclusive, that the negroes in question are not liable to the plaintiff’s demand. Much reliance has been placed upon the decision of the Constitutional Court, in *719the case of Boatwright and Glaze v. The Administrators of Edward Wingate, but it can have no possible bearing on the present action. This action is founded on a judgment heretofore rendered, and any recovery in it must be according to the terms of that judgment; now the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Willis v. TozerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1895