Tucker v. Condy

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Tucker v. Condy

28 S.C. Eq. 281

DecidedJanuary 15, 1855

StatusPublished

This text of 28 S.C. Eq. 281 (Tucker v. Condy) 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

Tucker v. Condy, 28 S.C. Eq. 281 (S.C. Ct. App. 1855).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

JOHNSTON, Ch.

Upon the point argued before us, (which, indeed, is not brought before us in any ground of appeal,) we [282]*282entirely agreee with tbe Chancellor. The point argued is, that, although according to the statute, and according to all the decisions upon its construction, the assets of a deceased debtor are distributable among his creditors, with reference to the rank of their demands at the time of his death; yet that this order is to be disturbed, so as to give a preference to the first creditor who obtains judgment against the executor.

Upon such a proposition the Court cannot hesitate. It is utterly untenable.

It is ordered that the order be affirmed and the appeal dismissed.

DüNKIN, Dargan and Wardlaw, CC., concurred.

Appeal dismissed.

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

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

JOHNSTON, Ch.

Upon the point argued before us, (which, indeed, is not brought before us in any ground of appeal,) we [282]*282entirely agreee with tbe Chancellor. The point argued is, that, although according to the statute, and according to all the decisions upon its construction, the assets of a deceased debtor are distributable among his creditors, with reference to the rank of their demands at the time of his death; yet that this order is to be disturbed, so as to give a preference to the first creditor who obtains judgment against the executor.

Upon such a proposition the Court cannot hesitate. It is utterly untenable.

It is ordered that the order be affirmed and the appeal dismissed.

DüNKIN, Dargan and Wardlaw, CC., concurred.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 S.C. Eq. 281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tucker-v-condy-scctapp-1855.