Rush v. Warren
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Witherspoon, J., Kershaw, February, 1885. The appeal was from the following Circuit decree: The cause was heard upon the report of the master and plaintiffs’ exceptions thereto. Upon notice before the hearing, the defendant could have required plaintiffs upon motion to state severally and distinctly the cause of action as well as to make the pleadings more definite and certain.
Read the full summary
Before Witherspoon, J., Kershaw, February, 1885. The appeal was from the following Circuit decree: The cause was heard upon the report of the master and plaintiffs’ exceptions thereto. Upon notice before the hearing, the defendant could have required plaintiffs upon motion to state severally and distinctly the cause of action as well as to make the pleadings more definite and certain. This was not done, the defendant preferring to rely upon a plea (I understand, an oral demurrer) to the jurisdiction of the court. I do not understand that any objection was interposed to the improper joinder of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice McIver.
The plaintiffs, as heirs at law and distributees of Levi Moore, deceased, bring this action in the County of Kershaw against the defendant as executrix of John Warren, deceased, and in her individual capacity for an account of the administration of the personal estate of Levi Moore, and for the purpose of setting aside a sale of a certain tract of land, bought by Sarah B. Warren in her individual capacity, under an alleged execution against said Levi Moore. It appears that sometime in 1862 Levi Moore, being seized and possessed of a…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Walker v. McDonaldSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1925
- Erskine v. MarkhamSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1909