Legal Opinion

Burkhalter v. Townsend

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 5, 1927No. 12202PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Cothran.

This is an appeal from an order of his Honor Judge Henry, striking out the defendant’s answer as sham and irrelevant, and as not stating facts sufficient to constitute a defense.

The cause of action of the plaintiffs is based upon alelgations of- fact, which are substantially as follows:

One P. L. Breeden, of Marlboro County, owned a tract of land containing 400 acres, more or less, known as Breeden-Adamville plantation, in Adamville township ,of said County; on December 30, 1918, he leased it to the defendant, Townsend for a term of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1897
  2. Germofert Mfg. Co. v. CastlesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1914
  3. Bank of Johnston v. FrippSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1915
  4. Interstate Chemical Corp. v. Farmington Corp.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1915

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. United States Rubber Co. v. White Tire Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1956
  2. Etiwan Fertilizer Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1943
  3. Bank of Fort Mill v. RollinsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1950
  4. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. LittleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1940
  5. System Terminal Corporation v. CornelisonWyoming Supreme Court · 1961

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API