Heyward v. Middleton
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Gage, J., Charleston, July, 1902. Action by Elizabeth M. Heyward against Henry Middleton and Julius H. Heyward, administrator of Susan S. Middleton. From Circuit decree, defendant, Henry Middleton, appeals. cite: Testimony is not sufficient to support the 'Finding as to advancements: 2 Strob. Eq., 148; 3 Id., 185; 5 Rich. Eq., 157; 2 McC.
Read the full summary
Before Gage, J., Charleston, July, 1902. Action by Elizabeth M. Heyward against Henry Middleton and Julius H. Heyward, administrator of Susan S. Middleton. From Circuit decree, defendant, Henry Middleton, appeals. cite: Testimony is not sufficient to support the 'Finding as to advancements: 2 Strob. Eq., 148; 3 Id., 185; 5 Rich. Eq., 157; 2 McC. Eq., 90. No evidence as to value of advancements at mother’s death: 11 S. C., 36; 20 S. C., 64; 21 S. C., 535. Before sale, partition in kind must be shown to be impractical: Code, 1902, sec. 2439; 35 S. E., 535; 32 S. E., 510. Prayer is no part of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Woods.
This case involves the settlement of the estates of Williams Middleton and his widow, Susan Middleton, between their children, the plaintiff, Elizabeh M. Heyward, and the defendant, Henry Middleton. It was called for trial by Hon. George W. Gage at the July, 1902, term of the Court of Common Pleas for Charleston County, and a decree was rendered fixing the rights of the parties and directing a sale of property.
The defendant, Henry Middleton, appeals, and the exceptions involve two questions aside from the merits: Did the Circuit Judge…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Davidson v. CopelandSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1904
- McComas v. RossCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2006