Pearson v. Matheson
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Wilson, J., Bennettsville, December, 1914. Action by Sam J. Pearson against A. J. Matheson and E. V; Richards. From a decree dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. submit: The reservation contained in the granting clause of the deed was in conflict with the general grant, and void: 2 McM.
Read the full summary
Before Wilson, J., Bennettsville, December, 1914. Action by Sam J. Pearson against A. J. Matheson and E. V; Richards. From a decree dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. submit: The reservation contained in the granting clause of the deed was in conflict with the general grant, and void: 2 McM. E. 24; 48 S. C. 316; 79 S. C. 166; 36 S. C. 295; 48 S. C. 341; 47 S. C. 288; 32 S. E. 676; 54 S'. C. 353; 39 S. E. 639, 651; 18 S. E. 668; 15 S. E. 890; 2 S. E. 31; 3 Washb. R. P. 464; 4 Kent, Com. 368; 13 Cyc. 672. Even if not so, it was a mere contract at…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Gage.
The appeal is from an order of the Circuit Court which dismissed the complaint.
The controversy arises out of a deed from Matheson to Watson and two written contracts betwixt the same parties.
The subject matter of the action is a skylight in the roof of a store building, and a right of way to and from the rear of the store building.
The occasion of the controversy arises out of the destruction by fire of the building about which the paper writings were had, and the erection of another building on the same site and foundations.
The…
2Cited by9 opinions
- STATE EX REL. CONVENTION CENTER v. EvansWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Fair v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1957
- Davis v. CordellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1960
- Taft v. Washington Mutual Savings BankWashington Supreme Court · 1923
- Piper v. TaylorNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.