Anderson v. Anderson

18 S.E.2d 9, 198 S.C. 412, 1941 S.C. LEXIS 95
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedDecember 15, 1941
Docket15343
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 18 S.E.2d 9 (Anderson v. Anderson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Anderson v. Anderson, 18 S.E.2d 9, 198 S.C. 412, 1941 S.C. LEXIS 95 (S.C. 1941).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court - was delivered by

Mr. Chief Justice Bonham.

A paper purporting to be the last will and testament of A. D. Anderson, deceased, was admitted to probate in common form in the Probate Court of Horry County. Within due time, S. D. Anderson and Gussie Anderson, who were named in the said paper as executor and executrix, were required by the Probate Court to have the same proved in due form of law.

To the petition that the purported will be proved in due fornT of law, the appellants herein served their answer, in *419 which they denied that the'said paper was'the last will and testament of the said A. D. Anderson.

The case was heard in the Probate Court, which passed its decree dated July 15, 1940, adjudging and decreeing that the said written instrument, dated October 8, 1935, purporting to be the last will' and testament of A. D. Anderson, deceased, was null and void,, and of no force and effect.

An appeal was taken to the Court of Common Pleas, from the order of the Probate Court aforesaid, which came on to be heard before the Honorable T. D. Tide, Judge of the Twelfth Circuit, then presiding, who filed his order, dated May 30, 1941, refusing the motion to dismiss the appeal.

The, order of Judge Tide fully sets forth the history of the litigation, and is entirely satisfactory to this Court.

Tet this order be reported as the judgment of this Court.

Appeal dismissed and judgment affirmed.

Messrs. Associate Justices Baker, Fishburne and Stukes and Mr. Acting Associate Justice G. Duncan Bellinger concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Henfield v. Taylor
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2003
Williams v. Williams
517 S.E.2d 689 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1999)
Myrtle Beach Lumber Co. v. Globe International Corp.
315 S.E.2d 142 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1984)
Equilease Corp. v. Weathers
272 S.E.2d 789 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1980)
City of Orangeburg v. Edwards
271 S.E.2d 314 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1980)
Bank for Savings and Trusts v. Towe
98 S.E.2d 539 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1957)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
18 S.E.2d 9, 198 S.C. 412, 1941 S.C. LEXIS 95, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-anderson-sc-1941.