Scriven v. Heyward

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Scriven v. Heyward

1 S.C. Eq. 119, 25 S.C.L. 119

DecidedFebruary 15, 1840

StatusPublished

This text of 1 S.C. Eq. 119 (Scriven v. Heyward) 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

Scriven v. Heyward, 1 S.C. Eq. 119, 25 S.C.L. 119 (S.C. Ct. App. 1840).

Pincite

Opinion

Curia, per

Butler, J.

held that, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, the motion was properly brought up to this- court. And, although the action was not technically .a trespass to try titles, yet it involved' the right to a privilege «or easement that could not well be ascertained without a sur[120]*120vey. It was an action to try titles to an incorporeal hereditament ; and there was no good reason why a survey should not be ordered. The defendant’s motion was therefore granted.

Colcock Sf Hutson for the motion. Gantt, Richardson, O’Neall and Earle, JJ. concurred.

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

Curia, per

Butler, J.

held that, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, the motion was properly brought up to this- court. And, although the action was not technically .a trespass to try titles, yet it involved' the right to a privilege «or easement that could not well be ascertained without a sur[120]*120vey. It was an action to try titles to an incorporeal hereditament ; and there was no good reason why a survey should not be ordered. The defendant’s motion was therefore granted.

Colcock Sf Hutson for the motion. Gantt, Richardson, O’Neall and Earle, JJ. concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 S.C. Eq. 119, 25 S.C.L. 119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scriven-v-heyward-scctapp-1840.