Hamer v. David
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Memminger, J., Dillon, Fall term, -. Action by W. M. Hamer against J. H. David. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Read the full summary
Before Memminger, J., Dillon, Fall term, -. Action by W. M. Hamer against J. H. David. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Mr. Rogers submits: One cannot rely upon misstatements of fact, if the truth is within reach: 101 S. C. 236; 107 S. C. 203; Columbia Savings Bank & Trust Company v. True: Advance Sheets, December 4, 1918. A party to a contract cannot hold fast to the benefits, and at the same time avoid the obligations under it: 88 S. C. 160. The measure of damage for fraud in sale or rent of land is the difference betweén the true value and the price agreed to be paid: 46 S.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Eraser.
The facts are: Mr. Gibson, Mr. Bethea, and Mr. Hayes were executors of H. P. Price and as such under the will of Mr. Price, were in charge of the land referred to in these proceedings. It appears that one Rising was the beneficiary for life. The plaintiff acquired the interest of Rising. The terms of the will are not set forth. Mr. David leased the land from the executors. The lease was about to expire, and Mr. David' desired to renew it. After conference between Mr. Hamer and the executors, a lease was agreed to be given to Mr.…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hamer v. DavidSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1923
- Hamer v. DavidSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1927
- Hamer v. DavidSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1927