Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1920

Blackmon v. Blackmon

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided January 27, 1920 · Watts, Moore, Lancaster, Gary, Gage, Fraser, Hydrick

101 S.E. 827; 113 S.C. 478; 1920 S.C. LEXIS 9 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Mr. J. Harry Foster , for appellants, submits: That while an executor may buy at his own sale, he must account for the actual value of the property: Code 1912, vol. I, sec. 3687. The executor should pay interest an annual balances: 83 S.C. 157 ; 57 S.C. 36 ; 20 S.C. 7 ; 28 S.C. 582 . The executor had no implied power to sell the personal property of the estate under the will and could only do so by order of the probate Court: Code of 1912, sec. 3689; 83 S.C. 157 . The appraisement is prima facie the correct value of the estate: Code of 1912, section 3689; 83 S.C. 157 ; 27 S.C. 332 ; Code of 1912, section 3627. It was error to allow disbursements not properly supported by proof that they were valid debts against the estate of M.A. Blackmon: 93 S.C. 525. Mr. R.S. Stewart , for respondent, submits: Testimony concerning the value of the lands sold by the executor under item 4 of the will was irrelevant and not in response to the allegations of the complaint and should have been excluded: 81 S.C. 566. An executor may become a purchaser at the sale of his testator under whatsoever authority the sale may be made, provided the property shall be sold for the actual value at the time of said sale: Civil Code, section 3687; 37 S.C. 124 . Not knowing how much the indebtedness against the estate was, the executor could not tell what part would go to the widow and what part to the special beneficiaries, and his refusal to pay over the money, was proper, and he cannot be charged with interest on the annual balance: 83 S.C. 157 . An order from the probate Judge for the sale of personalty is not necessary where the will directs that the personal property be sold: Civil Code, sec. 3689.

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

For the reasons, assigned by his Honor, Judge Moore, it is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Gary and-Mr. Justice Gage concur.

Dissenting Opinion

Mr. Justice Hydrick,

dissenting. I think the preponderance of the evidence shows that the executor bought the land for less than its true value, and he should be required to account for the true value. I think, too, that the exceptions complaining of error in allowing the executor credit for *487 certain items which were not properly proved against the estate, and for payment of which he produced neither proof nor proper vouchers, should be sustained.

Mr. Justice Fraser concurs with Mr. Justice Hydrick.

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