Vernon v. Hammep

19 S.C.L. 269
CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
DecidedMay 15, 1833
StatusPublished

This text of 19 S.C.L. 269 (Vernon v. Hammep) 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
Vernon v. Hammep, 19 S.C.L. 269 (S.C. Ct. App. 1833).

Opinion

Curia per

Johnson J.

Evidence of the hand writing of the defendant, was clearly admissible, notwithstanding the subscribing witness proved that he did not see the defendant sign. In Pearson v. Weightman, 1 Constitutional Reports 336, the defendant in trespass, to try titles to land, claimed title to the land in dispute, under the will of Benj. Paul Williams, and the will was established on proof of the hand writing [270]*270the subscribing witnesses and the testator, notwithstanding all three of the witnesses swore they had not subscribed it. They were all too, men of good character — on that ground,-therefore, the motion must be granted.

Henry, for the motion. S. Bobo, contra.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 S.C.L. 269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vernon-v-hammep-scctapp-1833.