Napier v. Matheson
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Gage, J., Marlboro, April term, 1909. Action by C. D. Napier against A. J. Matheson. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals on the following exceptions : I. “His Honor erred in not charging defendant’s fourth request, to wit: ‘That the plaintiff has shown affirmatively that he has title to not over four-fifths of the land embraced in trJct No. 4, and that he is in the exclusive possession of more than that proportion and cannot recover the balance, and the…
Read the full summary
Before Gage, J., Marlboro, April term, 1909. Action by C. D. Napier against A. J. Matheson. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals on the following exceptions : I. “His Honor erred in not charging defendant’s fourth request, to wit: ‘That the plaintiff has shown affirmatively that he has title to not over four-fifths of the land embraced in trJct No. 4, and that he is in the exclusive possession of more than that proportion and cannot recover the balance, and the verdict must be for the defendant,’ when the proposition requested correctly stated the law applicable to the case before…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Gary.
This action was commenced on the -day of July, 1906, to recover the possession of a lot or parcel of land, containing about one-eighth of an acre. “At the conclusion of the testimony the defendant moved the Court to direct a verdict in his favor, on the ground that the plaintiff had shown title only to' four-sixths of the large 4acre tract, and that no title whatever had been shown to the remaining one-third of the tract, which was more than the' amount defendant was in possession, of, which motion was refused.” The jury rendered a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Duren v. KeeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1897
- Patterson v. CrenshawSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1890
3Cited by1 opinion
- Lucius v. DuboseSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1920