Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1915

Kimbrell v. Mills & Young Co.

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided April 9, 1915 · Gary

84 S.E. 996; 100 S.C. 443; 1915 S.C. LEXIS 66 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Messrs. Dunlap, Dunlap Hollis , for appellant, cite: Civil Code, sec. 4106. "Mentioned" defined: 5 Words and Phrases 4476. Description sufficient to enable persons to identify the property: 28 N.C. 362 ; 37 N.Y. 593 ; Smith, Chattel Mtges., p. 10; Equitable Mortgages, 45 S.C. 133 ; 51 Ga. 168 ; 74 Ga. 762 . Description: 3 L.R.A. 795; 77 Ala. 283 ; 51 Ark. 410 ; 3 Dak. 148; 34 Or. 87 ; 75 Am. St. Rep. 564; 20 Cyc. 481. Messrs. Spencer, Spencer White cite: As to review of facts: 87 S.C. 246 . Equitable mortgage not notice to purchasers: 39 S.C. 77 ; 1 Strob. Eq. 393; 10 Rich. Eq. 149.

Opinion of the Court

The .opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chiee Justice Gary.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed for the reasons therein assigned.

FooTNorE.—As to sufficiency of the description in mortgages of crops, see Livingsion v. S. A. L. Ry., ante, and note 23 L. R. A. 458 to 460.

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