Wardlaw & Edwards v. Rayford

Citations

• 27 S.C. 178
• 3 S.E. 71
• 1887 S.C. LEXIS 114

Syllabus

<p>1. A new' trial will not be granted for the improper admission of hearsay evidence, after objection made, if the same declarations are afterwards testified to by another witness without objection, and the matter is abundantly proved by other competent testimony.</p> <p>2. Where a witness is permitted to testify as to declarations of a certain character made to him, and he details declarations of another character, not admissible under the rules of evidence, the proper practice is to move to strike out the answer of the witness.</p> <p>3. Under the assurances of M. that V. had unincumbered title to a tract of land, P. took a mortgage of this land from V. to secure advances. Afterwards 0., acting under like assurances from M., took an assignment of P.’s mortgage, and then took a new mortgage from V., including therein the balance due on the P. mortgage, and also a debt otherwise due him by V. This second mortgage was foreclosed and the land sold. In action by these purchasers against M. (who had obtainecl possession of the land after this sale), held, that the purchasers were in privity with C., and through C. with P., and that. M. was estopped from asserting title antedating these mortgages, as well by his representations to P. as by those made to O.</p> <p>4. If the purchasers were not in privity with P., they would be regarded in equity as the assignees of the P. mortgage, and entitled to claim for that mortgage the estoppel attaching thereto.</p>