10422 | S.C. | Jun 28, 1920

June 28, 1920. The opinion of the Court was delivered by The facts are stated in the decree of his Honor, which, together with the exceptions, will be reported.

The respondent's attorneys in their written argument concede that there is but one issue in the case, and that is whether the fact that the lands were returned as the property *319 of Nancy Hough's estate, and not as the estate of Isaac Hough rendered the title of the purchaser void.

The case of Taylor v. Strauss, 95 S.C. 295" court="S.C." date_filed="1913-07-25" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/taylor-v-strauss-3886572?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="3886572">95 S.C. 295,78 S.E. 883" court="S.C." date_filed="1913-07-25" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/taylor-v-strauss-3886572?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="3886572">78 S.E. 883, is conclusive of this question, and shows that his Honor, the Circuit Judge, was in error.

Reversed.

© 2024 Midpage AI does not provide legal advice. By using midpage, you consent to our Terms and Conditions.