Aultman & Taylor Co. v. Rush
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Hudson, J., Abbeville, October, 1886. This was an action of foreclosure instituted by the Aultman & Taylor Company against J. N. Rush and Eugenia J. Rush, his wife. The mortgage was - given by the wife to secure two joint and several promissory notes, given by both defendants, for the purchase money of a steam engine, with a clause added requiring the payment of counsel fees in case of suit.
Read the full summary
Before Hudson, J., Abbeville, October, 1886. This was an action of foreclosure instituted by the Aultman & Taylor Company against J. N. Rush and Eugenia J. Rush, his wife. The mortgage was - given by the wife to secure two joint and several promissory notes, given by both defendants, for the purchase money of a steam engine, with a clause added requiring the payment of counsel fees in case of suit. The steam engine had been previously ordered in writing, as follows: New Market, June 4, 1881. To. the Aultman 3p Taylor Company, Mansfield, Ohio : You will please ship to the undersigned, J. N.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice Simpson.
The facts of this case, as stated in the decree of his honor, Judge Hudson, who heard it, are substantially as follows: The action was founded upon two notes, given by J. N. Rush and his wife, Eugenia, for the purchase money of a steam engine. The notes were secured by a mortgage upon a tract of land, the separate estate of the wife, which mortgage was executed by the wife, her husband joining therein. The object of the action was to foreclose the mortgage. Two defences were set up. First, a breach of contract, and a…
2Cited by4 opinions
- B. T. Electrical Enterprises, Inc. v. ADC Fairways Corp.Fairfax County Circuit Court · 1981
- Burwell v. South Carolina Tax CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- Burwell v. S.C. Tax CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- Kuster v. DicksonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina · 1891