Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1926

Houck v. Haigler

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided June 7, 1926 · Watts, Cothran, Citiee, Gary, Messrs, Blease, Stabler

133 S.E. 538; 135 S.C. 87; 1926 S.C. LEXIS 82 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Messrs. W.B. Martin , Ed. C., Mann and John S. Bowman , for appellant, cite: Buyer sometimes compelled to rely on representations of seller: 80 S.C. 293 . Buyer allowed reasonable time to discover defects in goods: 99 S.C. 383 . Assignee of mortgage takes subject to existing equities: 119 S.E., 829 ; 60 S.C. 234 . Messrs. Wolfe Berry for respondent.

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

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

Mr. Citiee Justice Gary and Messrs. Justices BlEase and Stabler concur.

Dissenting Opinion

Mr. Justice Cothran

(dissenting). I think that, Judge Dennis having found that a fraud had been perpetrated, upon Haigler, he should have disrupted the entire transaction and rendered judgment in favor of Haigler.

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