Witsell v. Mitchell

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Witsell v. Mitchell

37 S.C.L. 289

DecidedMarch 15, 1832

StatusPublished

This text of 37 S.C.L. 289 (Witsell v. Mitchell) 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

Witsell v. Mitchell, 37 S.C.L. 289 (S.C. Ct. App. 1832).

Pincite

Opinion

Curia, per

O’Neall, J.

The case of Scanlan vs. Porter, 1 Bail. 427, is decisive of this case. In that case, as well as this, the disjunctive conjunction “ or,” was used in the clause of the will. The same reasons exist in this case, as in that; why it should be construed “ and.” Giving to the clause of the will, in this case, that construction, ends the right of the plaintiffs to recover.

The motion to reverse the decision of the Judge below, on the special verdict, is therefore dismissed.

Johnson, J, concurred.

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

Curia, per

O’Neall, J.

The case of Scanlan vs. Porter, 1 Bail. 427, is decisive of this case. In that case, as well as this, the disjunctive conjunction “ or,” was used in the clause of the will. The same reasons exist in this case, as in that; why it should be construed “ and.” Giving to the clause of the will, in this case, that construction, ends the right of the plaintiffs to recover.

The motion to reverse the decision of the Judge below, on the special verdict, is therefore dismissed.

Johnson, J, concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 S.C.L. 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/witsell-v-mitchell-scctapp-1832.