Coggins v. McKinney
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Shipp, J., Spartanburg, - term, -. Action by J. H. Coggins against Wm. McKinney and Minnie Coggins. From a judgment for plaintiff for a part of the relief demanded, both parties appeal. cite: As to statute of fraiids: 21 S. C. 480; 3 Pomeroy Eq.
Read the full summary
Before Shipp, J., Spartanburg, - term, -. Action by J. H. Coggins against Wm. McKinney and Minnie Coggins. From a judgment for plaintiff for a part of the relief demanded, both parties appeal. cite: As to statute of fraiids: 21 S. C. 480; 3 Pomeroy Eq. Jurisprudence, sec. 1409; 48 S. C. 66; 63 S. C. 561; 36 Cyc. 681, 682, 683, 684, 685; 23 S. C. 1; 29 S. C. 72, and authorities cited therein; 3d Hill’s Law, p. 173, and star page 487; 77 S. C. 511, and cases cited therein; 21 S. C. 480. As to betterments: 102 S. C. 465; 36 Cyc. 684; 77 S. C. 511. cite: As to the statute of frauds: Code of 1912,…
1Opinion of the Court
July 14, 1919. The opinion of the Court was delivered by Action for specific performance, and that denied, for money spent in good faith by the occupant to improve the property.
The master found against the plaintiff on the first issue and for the plaintiff on the second issue; and the Circuit Court confirmed that report.
Appeal by both sides. We are content to abide the judgment of the Court upon the first issue, and without any discussion of the question. The report of the master (confirmedpro forma by the Circuit Court) satisfies us in the conclusion he reached.
The second issue is not free…
2Cited by2 opinions
- New Prospect Area Fire District v. New Prospect Ruritan ClubSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1993
- Gheen v. GheenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1981