Payne v. Williams

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Payne v. Williams

29 S.C.L. 15

DecidedDecember 15, 1843

StatusPublished

This text of 29 S.C.L. 15 (Payne v. Williams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Payne v. Williams, 29 S.C.L. 15 (S.C. Ct. App. 1843).

Pincite

Opinion

Caña, per

Ward law, J.

This Court concurs in the views taken on the Circuit.

It is plain that David Bozeman’s possession established no right of way against himself. Even deeds of partition [17]*17between the sons would not have subjected the share of one to an easement in favour of the others, without some expression, or necessary implication from expressions used ; much less will an irregular partition shewn by a mere bond for titles containing nothing peculiar, do so. The time since the partition, has been too short to confirm any possession or verbal acknowledgments that have occurred in this time. The motion is dismissed.

Richardson, O’Neall, Evans and Butler, J J. concurred.

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

Caña, per

Ward law, J.

This Court concurs in the views taken on the Circuit.

It is plain that David Bozeman’s possession established no right of way against himself. Even deeds of partition [17]*17between the sons would not have subjected the share of one to an easement in favour of the others, without some expression, or necessary implication from expressions used ; much less will an irregular partition shewn by a mere bond for titles containing nothing peculiar, do so. The time since the partition, has been too short to confirm any possession or verbal acknowledgments that have occurred in this time. The motion is dismissed.

Richardson, O’Neall, Evans and Butler, J J. concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 S.C.L. 15, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/payne-v-williams-scctapp-1843.