Legal Opinion

In Re Estate of Percival

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 20, 1915No. 9110PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Before SeasE, J., Charleston, On December 12, 1914, the Board of Commissioners of the Sinking Fund of the State of South • Carolina commenced proceedings, under Civil Code 1912, secs. 4076 to 4098, to escheat the property left by Belle Percival, otherwise known as Anne Douise Purcell (Purcil), late of Charleston, S. C., who died November 29, 1914, intestate, and it was alleged without heirs.

Read the full summary

Before SeasE, J., Charleston, On December 12, 1914, the Board of Commissioners of the Sinking Fund of the State of South • Carolina commenced proceedings, under Civil Code 1912, secs. 4076 to 4098, to escheat the property left by Belle Percival, otherwise known as Anne Douise Purcell (Purcil), late of Charleston, S. C., who died November 29, 1914, intestate, and it was alleged without heirs. A petition by way of traverse of the notification was filed by Bridget Purcell, James Purcell, Nora Bush, Mary Markle and others on 24th of February, 1915, alleging they are the heirs at law of Anne…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Gage.

The exigencies of the cause prevents a recital of its history and a full statement of the issues which have been made. So much of that as shall be necessary may be set out by the reporter. The appeal is from an order of the Circuit Court which directed the exhumation of a dead body interred in Magnolia Cemetery, at Charleston, in the last months of 1914. The object of the disinterment is to see if the body sustains certain marks which may certainly identify it as that of one who was the alleged child of Bridget Purcell, of the Dominion…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Stastny v. TachovskyNebraska Supreme Court · 1964
  2. In Re Percival's EstateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1917

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API