Smith v. Byers

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Smith v. Byers

86 S.E. 481, 102 S.C. 215, 1915 S.C. LEXIS 195

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedSeptember 30, 1915

Docket9207

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 86 S.E. 481 (Smith v. Byers) 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

Smith v. Byers, 86 S.E. 481, 102 S.C. 215, 1915 S.C. LEXIS 195 (S.C. 1915).

Pincite

Opinions

September 30, 1915. The opinion of the Court was delivered by For the reasons assigned by his Honor, the Circuit Judge, the judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

MESSRS. JUSTICES WATTS and GAGE concur in the opinion of the Court.

MR. JUSTICE HYDRICK. I concur in the result, because I do not agree to the proposition that the exclusive possession of a life tenant may not inure to the benefit of remaindermen.

MR. JUSTICE FRASER was disqualified, and did not sit in this case.

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

September 30, 1915. The opinion of the Court was delivered by For the reasons assigned by his Honor, the Circuit Judge, the judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

MESSRS. JUSTICES WATTS and GAGE concur in the opinion of the Court.

MR. JUSTICE HYDRICK. I concur in the result, because I do not agree to the proposition that the exclusive possession of a life tenant may not inure to the benefit of remaindermen.

MR. JUSTICE FRASER was disqualified, and did not sit in this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 S.E. 481, 102 S.C. 215, 1915 S.C. LEXIS 195, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-byers-sc-1915.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack