Sexton v. Hollis

Citations

• 26 S.C. 231
• 1 S.E. 893
• 1887 S.C. LEXIS 30

Syllabus

<p>1. The Circuit Judge did not violate the constitution in charging the jury that they could only find for plaintiffs a stated proportion of the land in dispute where the uncontradicted testimony showed that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover no more.</p> <p>2. A purchaser paid for land, took possession, and collected the rents, but the titles were made to another. Held, that a trust resulted to such purchaser.</p> <p>3. In action for the recover/of land, parol evidence is inadmissible to show that some twenty to thirty years ago a party, under whom defendant claims, was “the reputed owner” of this land.</p> <p>4. The inadmissibility of hearsay evidence, and the exceptions to this rule, discussed.</p>