Huntley v. Welsh
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Gage, J., Chesterfield, February, 1901. Action by Emily Huntley against Sebra Walsh, to cancel deed. From order dismissing complaint, plaintiff appeals. The former cites : As to undue influence: 24 Ency., 453, 455, 456. As to weak mind: Ibid., 457, 458. As to confidential relations: Ibid., 461, 477, 462, 463, 464; 1 Story Eq.
Read the full summary
Before Gage, J., Chesterfield, February, 1901. Action by Emily Huntley against Sebra Walsh, to cancel deed. From order dismissing complaint, plaintiff appeals. The former cites : As to undue influence: 24 Ency., 453, 455, 456. As to weak mind: Ibid., 457, 458. As to confidential relations: Ibid., 461, 477, 462, 463, 464; 1 Story Eq. Jur., secs. 221, 238; 24 S. C., &; 4 DeS., 697; 3 DeS., 273; 19 S. E. R., 206. As to sufficiency of' consideration: 21 S. C., 270; 9 S. E. R., 415; 19 S. C., 606; 35 S. E. R., 809. As to delivery: 9 Ency., 150, 153, 154, 155; 4 DeS., 617; 24 S. C., 596; 3 Rich.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was de-
livered by
Mr. Chiee Justice McIver.
This action was commenced on the 13th of September, 1899, for the purpose of having a paper, purporting to be a deed, conveying plaintiff’s interest in a certain tract of land to the defendant, can-celled and declared null and void. The grounds upon which this claim is based are that the plaintiff, at the time she signed said paper, was quite old and in a feeble state of health, and that by fraud and undue influence she was induced by the defendant to sign said paper; that there was no consideration, or at most a very…
2Cited by6 opinions
- GILBERT v. McLEOD INFIRMARYSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1951
- Burke v. BurkeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1927
- Pruitt v. LambertTennessee Supreme Court · 1957
- Bell v. BellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1914
- Huggins v. TurnerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1917
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.