Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1920

Parker v. Horton

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided June 28, 1920 · Gary

103 S.E. 546; 114 S.C. 313; 1920 S.C. LEXIS 130 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Mr. W.B. DeLoach , for appellants, cites: Sale of lands for taxes under tax execution issued in name of wrong party is void; and placing void titles on the record will draw to them no vitality: 79 S.C. 517 ; 80 S.C. 29 ; 84 S.C. 1 ; 95 S.C. 301 ; 34 S.C. 364 . Mr. C.L. Prince , for respondents, cites: Tax sale should be sustained if assessment was in such name or with such description as to give notice to owners, even if it not be technically correct: 67 S.C. 535 ; 79 S.C. 517 ; 3 Rich. 27; Cooley Taxation 471; 80 U.S. 510 ; Black Tax Titles 110.

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court, was delivered by

Mr. Ci-iiEE Justice Gary.

The facts are stated in the decree of his Honor, which, ■together with the exceptions, will be reported.

The respondent’s attorneys in their written argument concede that there is but one issue in the case, and that is whether the fact that the lands were returned as the prop *319 erty of Nancy Hough’s estate, and not as the estate of Isaac Hough rendered the title of the purchaser void.

The case of Taylor v. Strauss, 95 S. C. 295, 78 S. E. 883, is conclusive of this question, and shows that his Honor, the Circuit Judge, was in error.

Reversed.

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