Legal Opinion · Dissent

Shayne of Miami, Inc. v. Greybow, Inc.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided December 16, 1957No. 17367Published

1DissentOxner, Justice

I find no sound basis upon which respondent’s claim against the receiver for the balance due on the purchase price of her stock can be sustained. The position taken by her throughout this litigation has been that she sold her stock to the corporation and not to her husband and that the agreement between her and Greybow should be reformed to show that such was the intention of the parties. The County Judge took that view and allowed a reformation. I think the agreement discloses in clear and unambiguous language an intention to sell the stock to Greybow and that parol evidence was inadmissible…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. In re Fechheimer Fisher Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1914
  2. Matthews Bros. v. PullenCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1920
  3. Hoover Steel Ball Co. v. Schaefer Ball Bearings Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1919
  4. In Re. American Slicing Machine Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1923
  5. Davies v. Montana Auto Finance Corp.Montana Supreme Court · 1930

8 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