Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1911

Haselden v. Haselden

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided May 9, 1911 · Gary, Woods

71 S.E. 232; 89 S.C. 4; 1911 S.C. LEXIS 213 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Mr. W. St. Julien Jervey , for appellant, cites: In construing a deed plain words cannot be ignored: 1 Green., sec. 275-7; 17 Ency. 2; 102 U.S. 235 ; 22 Wall. 105-12; 15 Wall. 94. As to election of dower by widow: 2 DeS. 295; 3 Bro. C.C. 255; 4 DeS. 295; 3 Rich. Eq. 281; 29 N.J. Eq. 54 ; 51 N.J. Eq. 491 ; 14 R.I. 375 ; 111 Wis. 208 ; 8 A. E. Dec. in Eq. 729. Heirs at law are not bound by ex parte decree in case to which father alone was party made after his death: 79 S.C. 316 ; 86 S.C. 470 ; Freeman on Jud., sec. 156; 56 S.E. 81; 47 S.C. 572 ; 38 Ill. 316 ; 20 Ency. P. P. 518; 6 T.B. Mon. 380. Did title pass by decree? 44 Ga. 319 ; 26 Ency. 134; 20 Ency. 385. Messrs. Willcox Willcox and Octavus Cohen , contra, cite: Where husband conveys wife must first exhaust unclaimed lands for dower: 142 N.C. 517 . When widow elects as to dower: 3 Rich. Eq. 281; 2 McM. 218. Heirs at law of husband are bound by deed made by mother under order of Court: 11 Ency. 415; 1 Black on Jud., sec. 87; 2 Id., secs. 517, 534.

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Gary.

This is an action for admeasurement of dower.

*9 The facts are fully stated, in the decree of his Honor the Circuit Judge.

3 The third assignment of error is as follows: “Because his Honor, showed a misapprehension of the evidence in this, he says, the deed from the children to the mother, ‘does not (sic) declare that the land so conveyed, is the dower of the said Rebecca, from the landed estate of her late husband James H. Haselden.’ Whereas, by an inspection of the deed, before the Court, it appears expressly stated in the deed, that this property is set off as dower, in the lands of her husband. Therein he erred.”

It appears that the error was merely clerical and that the Circuit Judge intended that the word “only” should1 be inserted between the words “not” and “declare.”

We do not deem it necessary to consider any other exception specifically.

For the reasons assigned by the Circuit Judge, the said decree is affirmed.

Mr. Justice; Woods concurs in the result.

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