Eason v. Witcofskey
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Pressley, J,, Charleston, This was a controversy without action submitted upon the following agreed statement of facts : William Gr.
Read the full summary
Before Pressley, J,, Charleston, This was a controversy without action submitted upon the following agreed statement of facts : William Gr. Eason, auditor and ex officio escheator of Charleston County, claims against John F. Witcofskey, that he, the said John E. Witcofskey, as purchaser, as hereinafter set forth, shall specifically perform the contract of sale, which the said John E. Witcofskey entered into with him, the said escheator, as vendor of the property hereinafter described. And the said John F. Witcofskey resists said claim, and denies the validity of said claim. The following are…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mit. Justice McGowan.
This was a case agreed upon in a controversy submitted without action. (The statement of facts should be embraced in the report of the case.)
After argument, his honor, Judge Pressley, held as follows : “The question submitted, viz.: ‘Was the notice published duly advertised as required by law?’ is answered in the affirmative, and it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed, that the defendant, John P. Witcofskey, be and he is hereby required to perform specifically, the contract of sale made by William G. Eason, escheator, set forth in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. . RickettsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
- Shaw v. WilliamsIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
3Cited by4 opinions
- Attorney General ex rel. Trahair v. Landel Metropolitan DistrictMichigan Supreme Court · 1947
- Bank of Columbia v. HavirdSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1914
- Atty. Gen. v. Landel Met. Dist.Michigan Supreme Court · 1947
- Cannon v. Haverty Furniture Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1935