Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1907

Montague v. Hood

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided September 24, 1907 · Pope

58 S.E. 767; 78 S.C. 222; 1907 S.C. LEXIS 196 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Messrs. B.A. Hagood and Huger Sinkler for appellant. Mr. Hagood cites: The mere mention of a fact in casual conversation cannot take the place of notice by record required by statute: Code 1902, 2457; 74 S.C. 372 ; 57 S.C. 357 . Messrs. Raysor Summers , contra, cite: Injunction will not be granted as a means to obtain possession of property: 1 High on Inj., 270, 271; 27 S.C. 408 ; 54 S.C. 408 ; 69 S.C. 56 ; 42 S.C. 144 . Contract was binding although only signed by Warly: 1 Chitty's Con., 453. And this contract established relation of landlord and tenant: 54 S.C. 289 ; 36 S.C. 274 ; 18 Ency., 606; 19 Mo., 118 ; 32 Neb. 195 ; 118 Pa. St., 578. Entry and occupation by defendant constituted acceptance: 77 Col., 286; 147 Pa. St., 501.

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chief Justice Pope.

After a careful consideration of the testimony set forth in the record in this case, this Court is satisfied that the decree of the Circuit Judge is correct, and, therefore, adopts it as the opinion of this Court.

It is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.