Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1921

Turner v. Moore

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided November 4, 1921 · Watts

109 S.E. 133; 117 S.C. 536; 1921 S.C. LEXIS 166 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Messrs. DePass DePass and Colcock Colcock , for appellants, cite: Habendum of deed to grantee in fee after the death of the grantee was insufficient to change the character of the instrument to a will: 37 S.E., 378 (Va.); 10 Rich. Eq., 217. Payments of a child for its parent presumed gratuitous: 132 Ala., 85 ; 31 S.C. 458 . Parent living with child raises no implication of promise by parent to pay: 32 Atl., 286; 31 So., 454; 37 Cent. Dig., "Parent and Child," Sec. 63 1-2. Voidable conveyance: 1 Civ. Code, 1912, Sec. 3459. Messrs. Thomas Talbird and W.J. Thomas , for respondents, cite: Payments from debtor to creditor will be presumed to be on the debt even though parties are child and parent: 31 R.C.L., 126-7; 22 A. E. Enc. L., 511; 28 A. E. Enc. L., 769; 165 U.S. 394 .

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

This was an action to set aside a conveyance for damages for alleged fraud and collusion. After issue joined the cause was finally referred to J. M. L. Kirkland, Esq., as special referee, to take testimony and report to the Court *537 his findings in the case. Upon the coming in of his report ‘exceptions were duly taken, and Judge Rice heard the cause ■ on exceptions to referee’s report, and overruled the exceptions, and sustained and confirmed the report of the referee., From the decree of Judge Rice appellants appeal, and by ten exceptions impute error.

This Court has decided in a number of cases—among others, Hickson Lumber Co. v. Stallings, 91 S. C., 473; 74 S. E., 1072, and Leland v. Morrison, 92 S. C., 501; 75 S. E., 889, Ann. Cas. 1914B, 349—that the appellants shall satisfy this Court that the findings of the Circuit Court are against the weight of the evidence. In the case at bar we have the concurring findings of both the special referee and the Circuit Judge, and the appellants have failed to convince this Court that their findings are against the weight of the evidence; and we see no error at all in the decree of his Honor.

All exceptions are overruled and judgment affirmed..

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