Harrelson v. Sarvis
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Wallace, J., Horry, June, 1892. This was an action by N. O. Harrelson against D. J. Sarvis and J. M. Sarvis, commenced January 10, 1891. It was an action for the recovery of a tract of land. As a part of plaintiff’s chain of title, he introduced deed from J. F. Moody to D. J. Blanton, conveying “to the said D. J. Blanton all that plantation,” &c., with no habendum clause.
Read the full summary
Before Wallace, J., Horry, June, 1892. This was an action by N. O. Harrelson against D. J. Sarvis and J. M. Sarvis, commenced January 10, 1891. It was an action for the recovery of a tract of land. As a part of plaintiff’s chain of title, he introduced deed from J. F. Moody to D. J. Blanton, conveying “to the said D. J. Blanton all that plantation,” &c., with no habendum clause. Also, deed with warranty only against the grantors and those claiming under them, which commenced as follows: “Know all men by these presents, that we, Evaline Moody, widow of the late J. T. Moody, James A. Moody, and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice McGowan.
This was an action to recover a tract of land (300 acres) in the county of Horry. The answer of the defendants did not state under what title they claimed, but put in a general denial, alleging adverse possession by themselves and their ancestors more than twenty years, under *16claim of title, and interposing the statute of limitations. After the plaintiff closed her testimony, the judge granted a non-suit in general terms, because “the plaintiff' had failed to make out her chain of title to the premises in question.”- That makes it…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Windham v. HowellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1907
- Cone v. BenjaminSupreme Court of Florida · 1946
- McMillan v. HughesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1911
- Lyles v. FellersSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
- Dupuy v. WilliamsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1912
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.