Buerhaus v. DeSaussure
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Hudson, J., Charleston, August, 1892. Action by Marie L. Buerhaus, as administratrix de bonis non, cum testamento annexo, of Etienne Poincignon, deceased, and upon the death of plaintiff, pending action, continued in the name of Caroline McNulty, as successor in the same office, against Martha G. DeSaussure, as executrix, and others.
Read the full summary
Before Hudson, J., Charleston, August, 1892. Action by Marie L. Buerhaus, as administratrix de bonis non, cum testamento annexo, of Etienne Poincignon, deceased, and upon the death of plaintiff, pending action, continued in the name of Caroline McNulty, as successor in the same office, against Martha G. DeSaussure, as executrix, and others. The master’s report was as follows: This case was referred to me by an order of the court, filed April 9th, 1888, to take the testimony, hear and determine all the issues made by the pleadings, with leave to report any special matter. I have held…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Ghiee Justice McIyer.
In view of the fact that, the *488reports of the master, and the decree of the Circuit Judge, which should be incorporated in the report of this case, will furnish a sufficient statement of the facts of this somewhat complicated case, to enable us to determine the many questions raised by these appeals, we will not undertake to make any such statement here, but will content ourselves with a bare outline of the uncontested facts of the case, which will be sufficient to afford a general idea of the nature and objects of the action,…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Bagwell v. HintonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1944
- Pitcher v. LampmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- In Re Estate of PeaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Anderson v. BowersDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1954
- In Re Ouzts'estateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1964
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.