Legal Opinion
Hickson v. Davenport
District Court, W.D. South Carolina
Decided February 23, 1918Published
In Equity. Suit by one Hickson and others against one Davenport and others. On motion by defendants to dismiss the bill.
1Opinion of the Court
JOHNSON, District Judge.
This is a motion by the defendants to dismiss the bill for want of equity. The rights of the parties depend *320upon the construction of a deed. In 1844 Tuily Bolling conveyed the land described in the bill “to my said daughter, Martha Ann Bolling, during her natural life and after her death to the issue of her body.” The habendum clause is:
“Unto the said Martha Ann Bolling, and then to the issue of her 'body, them, their heirs and assigns, forever; but if any child of Martha Ann should die before she does, leaving issue, then the child or children to take the share its…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Burgess v. SeligmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Kuhn v. Fairmont Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Adams v. VernerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1915
- McMichael v. McMichaelSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1898
- Clark v. NevesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1907
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.