Moon v. Center

130 S.E. 549, 133 S.C. 51, 1925 S.C. LEXIS 52
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedDecember 8, 1925
Docket11877
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 130 S.E. 549 (Moon v. Center) 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
Moon v. Center, 130 S.E. 549, 133 S.C. 51, 1925 S.C. LEXIS 52 (S.C. 1925).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Acting Associate Justice R. O. Purdy.

We adopt the statement made in the case on appeal:

“This case was instituted to foreclose a mortgage over real estate in Greenville County, the note and mortgage alleged to have been given for $460 in 1915.
“Defendant pleaded general denial, no consideration, failure of consideration, past consideration, and payment; and a counterclaim was set up for $230 for failure to mark mortgage satisfied on record after defendant demanded same of the plaintiff. Case was referred to the master to take testimony and report his findings of law and fact. The master found in favor of the plaintiff, and recommended fore *53 closure by sale of land; and, upon exceptions to his report, same was confirmed by Hon. M. F. Ansel, county judge.”

■ The testimony is conflicting.' The respondent having possession of the evidences of the debt, the burden of proof was upon the appellant to make .good his defenses by the greater weight of the evidence. The master had the parties before him, and doubtless knows them. He has found against the defendant on the conflicting testimony, and the county Court has affirmed such finding.

It is difficult for this Court to say, after studying the record, just where the truth may be found. Not having been shown that the master and the county Court have erred in their conclusions, the judgment of the county Court is affirmed. Visanska v. B. & L. Ass'n, 41 S. C., 546, 19 S. E., 202. Miller v. Smith, 103 S. C., 208; 88 S. E., 354.

Messrs. Justices Watts, Fraser and Marion concur. Mr. Chiee Justice Gary did not participate.

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

Related

Sanders v. Salley
322 S.E.2d 829 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
130 S.E. 549, 133 S.C. 51, 1925 S.C. LEXIS 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moon-v-center-sc-1925.