De Millen v. McAlilley

Supreme Court of South Carolina

De Millen v. McAlilley

27 S.C.L. 499

Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided July 1, 1836·Published

Opinion

Curia, per

Gantt, J.

The report of the presiding judge in this case is so full and explicit, and his reasoning so satisfactory on the law giving construction to the deed, under which the plaintiff rests her claim, that it is deemed unnecessary to add any thing further in support of the views taken by him. It is therefore adopted as the opinion of the court, and the nonsuit as ordered cannot be set aside. The motion is therefore refused.

Richardson, Butler, Earle and Evans, JJ. concurred.

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

Curia, per

Gantt, J.

The report of the presiding judge in this case is so full and explicit, and his reasoning so satisfactory on the law giving construction to the deed, under which the plaintiff rests her claim, that it is deemed unnecessary to add any thing further in support of the views taken by him. It is therefore adopted as the opinion of the court, and the nonsuit as ordered cannot be set aside. The motion is therefore refused.

Richardson, Butler, Earle and Evans, JJ. concurred.

De Millen v. McAlilley, 27 S.C.L. 499 (S.C. 1836).

Pincite

27 S.C.L. 499 (De Millen v. McAlilley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.