Wilson v. Miller

16 S.C.L. 437
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided November 15, 1824·Published

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Mr. Justice -Huger.

In the case of Eddings and Glasscock; 1 N. and M'C 295, it was only decided that a nulla bona was not sufficient to ,es4 tablish the insolvency of the defendant. It has never been; ruled that a ca. sa. with a return of non est inventus, was necessary to prove insolvency. In all cases satisfactory proof must; be adduced; but other proof than a ca. sa. may be sufficient to established the insolvency. A new trial is therefore granted.

Mott, Johnson, Colcock and Richardson, Justices, concurred.

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

Wilson v. Miller, 16 S.C.L. 437 (S.C. 1824).

16 S.C.L. 437 (Wilson v. Miller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.