Groce v. Groce

127 S.E. 719, 131 S.C. 416, 1925 S.C. LEXIS 152
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedMay 6, 1925
Docket11760
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 127 S.E. 719 (Groce v. Groce) 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
Groce v. Groce, 127 S.E. 719, 131 S.C. 416, 1925 S.C. LEXIS 152 (S.C. 1925).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

The decree of Judge Townsend is satisfactory to this Court under the authorities quoted by him (Dicks v. Cassels, 100 S. C., 341; 84 S. E., 878. Kerr v. Kennedy, 105 S. C., 496, 500, 505; 90 S. E., 177. Joyner v. Hoffman, 59 S. C., 535; 38 S. E., 174), and also Cromwell v. Simons (C. C. A.), 280 F., 663; 671. Van Horn v. Demarest, 76 N. J. Eq., 386; 77 A., 354. Bolling v. Bolling’s Adm’r, 146 Ky., 316; 142 S. W., 387, Ann. Cas., 1913C, 306. Armstrong’s Adm’r v. Shannon, 177 Ky., 547; 197 S. W., 950, and it is incumbent that the appellant should satisfy this Court of the correctness of his contention by the preponderance of the evidence, which he has failed to do.

It is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be affirmed.

Mr. Chiee Justice Gary and Messrs. Justices Fraser and Marion and Mr. Acting Associate Justice Jas. W. Johnson concur. Mr. Justice Cothran did not participate.

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

Related

McMillan v. King
7 S.E.2d 521 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 S.E. 719, 131 S.C. 416, 1925 S.C. LEXIS 152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/groce-v-groce-sc-1925.