Rapley v. Klugh

Citations

• 40 S.C. 134
• 18 S.E. 680
• 1893 S.C. LEXIS 22

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence — Code, $ 400 — Grantee.—A plaintiff in the action and one under whom she claims her rights to the land in dispute, are not incompetent witnesses, under section 400 of the Code of Procedure, to transactions between them and one now deceased, where the defendant defends as fourth grantee in succession from the executor of such deceased person, the defendant not being named in the proviso to section 400 in any of the classes against whom such testimony by a party in interest is interdicted.</p> <p>2. Ibid. — Assignment op Contract to Purchase — Case Criticised. — Where a purchaser of land under a parol contract has completed his payment of the purchase money, and title to the land is made to his wife by his direction, his verbal assignment is sufficient and may be proved by parol. This case distinguished from Mims v. Chandler. 21 S. G., 494.</p> <p>3. Tbid. — Receipts.—Parol testimony is admissible to prove that receipts offered in evidence were given to the witnesses by the vendor when payments were made by them on the purchase money of the land in dispute.</p> <p>4. Ibid. — Uncertainties in Deed. — Where a deed describes the land granted as the “R. H. W. Homestead,” containing two hundred acres, more or less, bounded by lands of persons named “and others,” the grantor may by parol identify the “R. H. W. Homestead,” and testify that “the others” included persons to whom small portions of this land had been previously conveyed.</p> <p>5. Tbid. — Diagram.—The plaintiff on the stand may refer to and explain a diagram or “sketch of a plat” made by the grantor and attached to the deed under which she holds title.</p> <p>6. Ibid. — Surveyor.—A surveyor may not be asked on the witness stand whether he discovered any marks,on the land to indicate that persons other than those named had got any of the land, the question being leading, irrelevant, and an inquiry of his opinion on the facts.</p> <p>1. Contract to Purchase Land — The Statute op Frauds is inapplica