Nichols v. Briggs
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Cothran, J., York, March, 1882. Action by John Nichols against B. P. Briggs. The opinion states the case. The Circuit decree was as' follows: The sole question discussed before me by the counsel engaged in the cause, and with much elaboration, may be'thus stated: Can an action for foreclosure of a mortgage of real estate be maintained, where the note which it is given to secure has been barred by the statute of limitations? It cannot be questioned, since the decision,…
Read the full summary
Before Cothran, J., York, March, 1882. Action by John Nichols against B. P. Briggs. The opinion states the case. The Circuit decree was as' follows: The sole question discussed before me by the counsel engaged in the cause, and with much elaboration, may be'thus stated: Can an action for foreclosure of a mortgage of real estate be maintained, where the note which it is given to secure has been barred by the statute of limitations? It cannot be questioned, since the decision, of the court in Arnold v. McKettar, 9 8. C. 335, that the amendment to section 113 of the code (see Lynch’s Code, p.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice McGowan.
This was an action to foreclose a mortgage upon a tract of land, executed by the defendant on June 4th, 1874, “ for the better securing the payment ” of his note under seal for $500, bearing date the same day, and payable one year thereafter (June 4th, 1875), with interest from date. The action was commenced January 14th, 1882, and the defense was the statute of limitations. It was insisted that from the time the note fell due, June 4th, 1875, until the action was brought, January 14th, 1882, more.than six years had expired, and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Bank of Fort Mill v. RollinsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1950
- Lever v. Lighting Galleries, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2007