Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1918

McDowell v. Landrum

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided July 6, 1918 · Gary

96 S.E. 991; 110 S.C. 405; 1918 S.C. LEXIS 95 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Messrs. Gwynn Hannon , for appellants, cite: As to the protection given by Courts of equity to the weak-minded, and 2d Pomeroy, 3d Ed., par. 878, p. 1564. As to alleged ratification by plaintiff: 1 McC. 391; 4 DeS. 708-713. Messrs. Nicholls Nicholls and Sanders DePass , for respondent, cite: As to mental capacity of grantor: 1 Black on Rescission and Cancellation of Contracts, sec. 262; 14 R.C.L., p. 590; 90 S.C. 207 ; 103 S.C. 450 ; 64 S.C. 272 . As to undue influence: 1 Black on Rescission and Cancellation of Written Contracts, secs. 237, 241, 242, 245; 90 S.C. 215 ; 16 S.C. 344 ; 5 Strob. 190; 9th Cor. Jur. 1180. As to fraud and misrepresentations: 16 S.C. 344 ; 5 Strob. 190; 1 Black on Res. and Can. Written Contracts, sec. 68; 1 Black on Res. and Can. of Contracts, sec. 76; 2d Bail. 269; Rich. 101; 1st Black on Res. and Can. of Cont., sections 110 and 121; 1st Rich., pp. 105-106; 9 S.C. 35 ; 101 S.C. 221 ; 12 R.C.L., p. 255; sec. 109, p. 363; sec. 117; 20 Cyc. 39; 1 Black on Res. and Can. of Con., sections 169, 170, p. 447; secs. 170, 172, 173, 175; 21 S.C. 270 ; 1 Elliott on Contracts, sec. 209, sec. 210; 103 S.C. 538 ; 2 Black on Res. and Can. of contracts, sections 610 and 614; 3 Elliott on Contracts, sections 2429 and 2430; 1 Strob. 400; 88 S.C. 160 ; 192 U.S. 242 ; 4 R.C.L., p. 513; 6 Cyc., p. 312; 2 Black Res. and Can. Con., sections 617 and 630. This Court has time and again sustained the Circuit Judge where he has overruled the master's report: 64 S.C. 256 ; 57 S.C. 218 ; 103 S.C. 450 .

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chief Justice Gary.

*407 This is an action to set aside a deed and mortgage. The facts are stated in the report of the master which was in favor of the plaintiff, but was overruled by his Honor, the Circuit Judge; and the plaintiff has appealed.

The issues are discussed at length, both by his Honor, the Circuit Judge, and the master, who differ in their findings upon all the material questions of fact. This Court has reached the conclusion, that the preponderance of the testimony is against the findings of fact by the Circuit Judge, and that he erred in overruling the report of the master.

Reversed.

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