E. Sternberger Co. v. Summerford Et Ux.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

E. Sternberger Co. v. Summerford Et Ux.

147 S.E. 627, 150 S.C. 60, 1929 S.C. LEXIS 117

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedMarch 28, 1929

Docket12621

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 147 S.E. 627 (E. Sternberger Co. v. Summerford Et Ux.) 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

E. Sternberger Co. v. Summerford Et Ux., 147 S.E. 627, 150 S.C. 60, 1929 S.C. LEXIS 117 (S.C. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

*75 The opinion of the Court wás delivered by

Mr. Justice Carter.

*73 “I concur in the finding of the referee that in the fall of 1918 the defendant Elizabeth Summerford paid the sum of $1,400 on the purchase-money mortgage executed by her husband and that should be secured to her. *74 The land is also subject to the mortgage of $1,000 and interest.

“I cannot agree with the referee in his conclusion as to the value of the land, and think the best way to determine this would be to sell the land at public auction and pay to Elizabeth Summerford the amount due her after, payment of the mortgage she executed, and whatever amount is left should be the property of J. W. Summer-ford. In other words, treat the deed in this case as if it were a mortgage to Mrs. Summerford to secure her for money due her, second in lien to the mortgage she executed on the land, and it is so ordered.

“Eet the parties apply for such further orders as will carry out these findings.”

*75 The facts and questions involved in this case are fully set forth in the report of the Special Referee, H. J. Riley, Esq., to whom the case was referred for the purpose of taking the testimony and passing upon all issues of fact and law. For the reasons stated in the report of the Referee and the ■decree of the Circuit Judge, Hon. E. C. Dennis, it is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be, and is hereby, affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Watts and Messrs. Justices ■Cothran, Brease and Stabler concur.

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

*75 The opinion of the Court wás delivered by

Mr. Justice Carter.

*73 “I concur in the finding of the referee that in the fall of 1918 the defendant Elizabeth Summerford paid the sum of $1,400 on the purchase-money mortgage executed by her husband and that should be secured to her. *74 The land is also subject to the mortgage of $1,000 and interest.

“I cannot agree with the referee in his conclusion as to the value of the land, and think the best way to determine this would be to sell the land at public auction and pay to Elizabeth Summerford the amount due her after, payment of the mortgage she executed, and whatever amount is left should be the property of J. W. Summer-ford. In other words, treat the deed in this case as if it were a mortgage to Mrs. Summerford to secure her for money due her, second in lien to the mortgage she executed on the land, and it is so ordered.

“Eet the parties apply for such further orders as will carry out these findings.”

*75 The facts and questions involved in this case are fully set forth in the report of the Special Referee, H. J. Riley, Esq., to whom the case was referred for the purpose of taking the testimony and passing upon all issues of fact and law. For the reasons stated in the report of the Referee and the ■decree of the Circuit Judge, Hon. E. C. Dennis, it is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be, and is hereby, affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Watts and Messrs. Justices ■Cothran, Brease and Stabler concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 S.E. 627, 150 S.C. 60, 1929 S.C. LEXIS 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/e-sternberger-co-v-summerford-et-ux-sc-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack