Tunno v. Happoldt

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Tunno v. Happoldt, 13 S.C.L. 188 (S.C. 1822)
Colcock, Gantt, Johnson, Nott, Richardson

Tunno v. Happoldt

Opinion of the Court

Mr. Justice Richardson

delivered the opinion of the court:

The claim of Mr. Ogier was by simple contract, i. e. by a note. And the question is,' can the mortgage deed change the character of the note, or give it a preference to other simple contract debts under the administrators law.

I cannot perceive any reason in supposing the simple contract debt changed by the mortgage, That deed gave a particular lien upion certain property, but here its object and intent terminated, and otherwise left the note as it stood before, still a simple contract. The postea must, therefore, ,be delivered to the plaintiff, with leave to enter up judgment upon the special verdict.

Justices Colcock, Nott, Gantt and Johnson, concurred.

Reference

Full Case Name
Adam Tunno v. Chris. Happoldt, Adm'r of Jno M. Happoldt
Status
Published