Haley v. Thames
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Aldrich, J., Clarendon, May, 1888» The opinion states the case. The Circuit decree was as follows : Section 1906 is the old act of 1839, allowing the ordinary (now judge of probate) to cite before him persons who illegally take possession-of the effects of deceased persons as executors de son tort to make them discover and account. In this case the parties in possession are rightfully in possession as heirs at law and distributees of the deceased.
Read the full summary
Before Aldrich, J., Clarendon, May, 1888» The opinion states the case. The Circuit decree was as follows : Section 1906 is the old act of 1839, allowing the ordinary (now judge of probate) to cite before him persons who illegally take possession-of the effects of deceased persons as executors de son tort to make them discover and account. In this case the parties in possession are rightfully in possession as heirs at law and distributees of the deceased. They are liable to account to the heirs and distributees, but must do so in an action for that purpose, and not as trespassers under this…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Jcstice McGowan.
On December 20, 1881, Huida A. Thames, of Clarendon County, departed this life intestate, seized and possessed of a tract of .land and some personal property, such as stock, household and kitchen furniture, &c. The intestate left no lineal descendants, but next of kin and collateral heirs as follows, viz., her husband, Rufus M. Thames, and a sister, Henrietta :E. Ridgeway, the defendants, and also the plaintiffs (nephews and nieces), children and grandchildren of a predeceased sister, Margarette M. Haley, namely, Fricndley W. Haley,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Judy v. JudySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2011
- Brock v. KirkpatrickSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1905
- Greenfield v. GreenfieldSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1965
- Judy v. JudySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2011