Stroman v. Rottenbury

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Stroman v. Rottenbury

4 S.C. Eq. 268

DecidedJune 15, 1812

StatusPublished

This text of 4 S.C. Eq. 268 (Stroman v. Rottenbury) 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

Stroman v. Rottenbury, 4 S.C. Eq. 268 (S.C. Ct. App. 1812).

Pincite

Opinion

From this decree an appeal was made on the following grounds:

First,- — That the limitation of the negroes after the reservation in the deed mentioned is void.

Second,' — .That if such limitation should be good, yet all the children of Catharina are equally entitled, in as much as the gift was not intended to vest immediately.

Third, — That the defendants (being trustees) could only be answerable for the actual profits of said negroes and therefore the report of commissioner allowing customary hire was erroneous, and ought not to have been confirmed.

Egan, defendant’s solicitor.

The appeal was heard at Columbia, by Chancellors James, Thompson, Desaussure, Gaillard and Waties, who unanimously affirmed the decree of the court, and dismissed the appeal.

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

From this decree an appeal was made on the following grounds:

First,- — That the limitation of the negroes after the reservation in the deed mentioned is void.

Second,' — .That if such limitation should be good, yet all the children of Catharina are equally entitled, in as much as the gift was not intended to vest immediately.

Third, — That the defendants (being trustees) could only be answerable for the actual profits of said negroes and therefore the report of commissioner allowing customary hire was erroneous, and ought not to have been confirmed.

Egan, defendant’s solicitor.

The appeal was heard at Columbia, by Chancellors James, Thompson, Desaussure, Gaillard and Waties, who unanimously affirmed the decree of the court, and dismissed the appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 S.C. Eq. 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stroman-v-rottenbury-scctapp-1812.