Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

28 S.C.L. 119

Steel v. Pride

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided November 15, 1842

Court of Appeals of South Carolina · decided 1842-11-15

Before O’Neall, J, at Chester, Fall Term, 1842. This was an action of debt on a note, under seal. The defendant’s defence was, that the land sold to him was the inheritance of the plaintiff’s wives, and that they had not so conveyed as to bar the inheritance. The defendant had accepted a deed from the plaintiffs, conveying the land to him, and was in the possession. The presiding Judge thought his defence could not avail him. The jury found for the plaintiffs.

Decided 1842-11-15

¶1Curia, per

Butler, J.

¶2It would be impossible to say, in this case, to what extent the title complained of was defective. The defendant is in the peaceable enjoyment of the land, and may never be disturbed in his possession. It has not been shewn that any one has an outstanding-subsisting title paramount to his own, for it may ultimately be that the plaintiff, the husband, whose wives’s inheritance he has conveyed, may inherit the whole of' the land, or that he may be able to make a good legal title to any part of it that may be brought in jeopardy. Or if the defendant feels any insecurity, he can quiet his title in a court *120of equity. In principle, the case cannot be distinguished from that of Hodges vs. Connor, and must be disposed of on the same ground. The decision below is affirmed, and the motion refused.

Eaves & Thomson, defendant’s attornies.Richardson, Q’Neall, Evans, Earle, and Wardlaw, JJ., concurred.
/28/scl/119 · .json · Public domain