Few v. Keller
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Klugh, J., Greenville, July term, 1901. Action by B. F. New against Sherman Killer and Joe Coville. From judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal on following exceptions: “1. Error in charging, ‘So that if a tenant holds land under a lease and dies, and his heirs come and have the Court, by its officer, to convey the land in fee simple to- somebody else after due proceedings, for the purpose of partition or for any other purpose, according to the usual practice, and…
Read the full summary
Before Klugh, J., Greenville, July term, 1901. Action by B. F. New against Sherman Killer and Joe Coville. From judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal on following exceptions: “1. Error in charging, ‘So that if a tenant holds land under a lease and dies, and his heirs come and have the Court, by its officer, to convey the land in fee simple to- somebody else after due proceedings, for the purpose of partition or for any other purpose, according to the usual practice, and under judgment of the Court, the officer who makes the conveyance acts as the agent of these parties who are tenants,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion; of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice McIvER.
This action was commenced on the 22d of January, 1901, to recover damages for alleged trespasses upon lands in the possession of plaintiff to which he claimed title, and also for an injunction to restrain further threatened trespasses. The defendants answered setting up two defenses. First, a general denial of the allegations contained in the complaint and an assertion of title in themselves. Second, a counter-claim for damages by reason of the cultivation by the plaintiff of the land during the year 1900, and a refusal to…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Sandel v. CousinsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1975
- Carr v. MouzonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1910
- Wolfe v. HerlihySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1950