Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1931

Gray v. Thomas

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided December 10, 1931 · Brease, Messrs, Stabrer, Carter, Featherstone, Cothran

161 S.E. 743; 163 S.C. 421; 1931 S.C. LEXIS 35 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Messrs. Padgett Moorer and J. Heyward Jenkins , attorneys for Estate of Edwin Denby, appellants, cite: Mutual promise constitutes valuable consideration: 124 S.C. 68 ; 117 S.E., 356 ; 158 S.E., 635; 159 S.E., 365 ; 160 S.C. 188 ; 158 S.E., 272 . Power of bank officials during thirty-day liquidation period: 123 S.C. 1 ; 115 S.E., 812 ; 150 S.C. 220 ; 147 S.E., 863 ; 141 S.C. 370 ; 139 S.E., 793 ; 144 S.C. 147 ; 142 S.E., 239 ; 148 S.C. 100 ; 145 S.E., 706 . Waiver: 40 C.J., 256. Party may be estopped to plead fraud by own carelessness: 129 S.C. 226 ; 123 S.E., 845 ; 146 S.C. 385 ; 144 S.E., 82 . Holder in due course of negotiable note has protection of mortgage: 97 S.C. 136 ; 26 S.C. 506 ; 134 S.C. 237; 117 S.C. 140 ; 91 S.C. 455 . Mr. W. Brantley Harvey , for respondent.

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Chief Justice Brease.

It is the opinion of this Court that the decree of his Honor, Circuit Judge Bonham, which will be reported, correctly disposed of the issues involved in the cause. Accordingly, the exceptions of the appellant are overruled, and the decree is affirmed.

Messrs. Justices Stabrer and Carter and C. C. Featherstone, Circuit Judge, concur. Mr. Justice Cothran did not participate on account of illness.

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