Bank v. Reynolds

• Citation: 96 S.E. 521
• Decision Date: 02 August 1918
• Docket Number: (No. 10065.)
• Parties: MURCHISON NAT. BANK. v. REYNOLDS et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina

96 S.E. 521

MURCHISON NAT. BANK.

v.REYNOLDS et al.

(No. 10065.)

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Aug. 2, 1918.

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Darlington County; T. H. Spain, Judge.

Action by the Murchison National Bank against J. B. Reynolds and others. From order of reference after judgment for plaintiff, defendants Ernest Clifford Reynolds and others appeal. Order reversed.

Miller & Lawson, of Darlington, for appellants.

Dargan & Cork and Spears & McInnes, all of Darlington, for respondent.

ERASER, J. Respondent's statement of the case:

"This action was commenced against the defendants J. B. Reynolds and Minnie P. Reynolds, some time during the year 1911, for the foreclosure of the mortgage described in the complaint, which said defendants alleged had been paid and satisfied. A judgment against said defendants for the full amount demanded in the complaint for the foreclosure of said mortgage and the sale of the mortgaged premises was obtained. After the land had been advertised for sale pursuant to said judgment, and before the sale, the said defendant J. B. Reynolds placed on record in the office of the clerk of court of Darlington county an instrument dated November 22, 1888, purporting to be a deed from one Sarah Tabitha Windham, under whom the mortgagors claimed title, conveying the greater part of the mortgaged premises to Ernest Clifford Reynolds, son of the said J. B. Reynolds and Minnie P. Reynolds, and the other children of the said J. B. Reynolds and Minnie P. Reynolds, if any, thereafter to be born. The appellants, as children of J. B. and Minnie P. Reynolds, all claim under said instrument. After the commencement of this action several judgments were obtained against the said J. B. Reynolds and Minnie F. Reynolds. The plaintiff, therefore, amended its summons and complaint so as to make all their children and lien creditors parties to the action, and served the amended summons and complaint on all of them. Immediately after the service of the amended summons and complaint on the children of J. B. and Minnie P. Reynolds [who are the appellants herein], E. C. Dennis, Esq., an attorney practicing at Darlington, S. C., notified plaintiff's counsel that he had been retained to present the said defendant, and asked for an extension of time in which to answer the complaint. Plaintiff's counsel granted the extension of time asked for by Mr. Dennis, but no answer having been served prior to the next term of court, refused to grant further...