Altman v. McBride
Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Before Withers, J. at Gillisonville, Fall Term, 1849. The action was trespass quare clausum fregit: and the act of trespass was charged to have been committed in the plaintiff’s family burial ground — and consisted in girdling or chopping round a walnut tree, so as to destroy it, which the plaintiff insisted was within the limits of the graveyard, aud in moving posts that had been set in the ground as ‘ landmarks.
Read the full summary
Before Withers, J. at Gillisonville, Fall Term, 1849. The action was trespass quare clausum fregit: and the act of trespass was charged to have been committed in the plaintiff’s family burial ground — and consisted in girdling or chopping round a walnut tree, so as to destroy it, which the plaintiff insisted was within the limits of the graveyard, aud in moving posts that had been set in the ground as ‘ landmarks. On the 22d day of January, 1846, a tract of land was conveyed by the plaintiff, Altman, to one John W. Mixon ; and two days afterwards, the same land was conveyed by John W. Mixon…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per O’Neall, J.
In this case the only question which deserves consideration is, whether the Judge below was right in telling the jury that they might adopt as the true location of the “square acre, containing the family graveyard,” “that which had been fixed by Altman and Mixon, before the former conveyed to the latter.”
That he was, will require but a few words from me to show. There is nothing in the deed which defines the precise spot by lines and boundaries. No one would doubt that *212after the deed was executed, the parties might mark it out, an¿ jf p should happen to be a few feet…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Lake View Acres Development Co. v. TindalCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1991