Solen Corporation v. Robertson

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Solen Corporation v. Robertson

140 S.E. 236, 142 S.C. 56, 1927 S.C. LEXIS 177

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedNovember 15, 1927

Docket12316

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 140 S.E. 236 (Solen Corporation v. Robertson) 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

Solen Corporation v. Robertson, 140 S.E. 236, 142 S.C. 56, 1927 S.C. LEXIS 177 (S.C. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

*62 The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Stabler.

The contentions of the plaintiffs, with a brief statement of the controversy, are set out in the report of the master. By reference to the report, it will be seen that the master found from the testimony, as a matter of fact, that the plaintiffs failed to establish adverse possession for the statutory period, and that the evidence did not make a case in which the principle of equitable estoppel should be applied to prevent a manifest wrong or injustice; but that, on the contrary, the testimony established the fact that the maintenance of the shed over the part of the city street, and the use of the shed in connection with the conduct of business, by the present and former owners of the premises now owned by the plaintiffs, had been at all times merely and purely permissive on the .part of the city authorities. These findings of fact were concurred in by the Circuit Judge, and the plaintiffs except and impute error.

We are satisfied, from a careful examination of the record, that the Circuit Judge was amply justified under the testimony in confirming the findings and recommendations of the master, and in adopting same as the judgment of the Court below. Let the report of the master be incorporated in the report of the case.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Watts and Messrs. Justices Cothran, BeEase and Carter concur.

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

*62 The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Stabler.

The contentions of the plaintiffs, with a brief statement of the controversy, are set out in the report of the master. By reference to the report, it will be seen that the master found from the testimony, as a matter of fact, that the plaintiffs failed to establish adverse possession for the statutory period, and that the evidence did not make a case in which the principle of equitable estoppel should be applied to prevent a manifest wrong or injustice; but that, on the contrary, the testimony established the fact that the maintenance of the shed over the part of the city street, and the use of the shed in connection with the conduct of business, by the present and former owners of the premises now owned by the plaintiffs, had been at all times merely and purely permissive on the .part of the city authorities. These findings of fact were concurred in by the Circuit Judge, and the plaintiffs except and impute error.

We are satisfied, from a careful examination of the record, that the Circuit Judge was amply justified under the testimony in confirming the findings and recommendations of the master, and in adopting same as the judgment of the Court below. Let the report of the master be incorporated in the report of the case.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Watts and Messrs. Justices Cothran, BeEase and Carter concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 S.E. 236, 142 S.C. 56, 1927 S.C. LEXIS 177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/solen-corporation-v-robertson-sc-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack