From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

George H. Hurst Sons v. Rhame et al

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jan 13, 1925
130 S.C. 367 (S.C. 1925)

Opinion

11664

January 13, 1925.

Before FEATHERSTONE, J., Sumter, April, 1924. Affirmed.

Action by George H. Hurst Sons against E.H. Rhame, Sr., and others. From order refusing to award priority to funeral expenses over chattel mortgage, plaintiffs appeal.

Messrs. Harby, Nash Hodges, for appellant, cite: Order of payment of deceased's debts: Code 1922, Sec. 5409; Code 1912, Sec. 3632; Code 1902, Sec. 2538; Rev. St. 1893, Sec. 2048; Gen. St. 1883, Sec. 1926; 1789 (V. Stat. III), Act 1878 (XVI Stat., 686). Code must control: 96 S.C. 313.

Messrs. Epps Levy, for respondent, cite: Order of payment of deceased's debts: Code 1922, Sec. 5409; 11 S.C. 250; 1 McC. Eq., 466; 23 S.C. 114.


January 13, 1925. The opinion of the Court was delivered by


The sole point in this appeal is whether the funeral expenses of an intestate have priority, under Section 5409, Code of 1922, over chattel mortgages, in the distribution of the proceeds of the sale of such chattels by an administrator.

The question is definitely determined in the negative by the cases hereinafter cited, which hold that the order of payment of debts by an administrator, prescribed by said section, refer only to such assets, in the hands of the administrator, as remain after the satisfaction of the liens which existed at the death of the intestate: Rutledge v. Hazlehurst, 1 McCord, Eq., 466. Keckley v. Keckley, 2 Hill, Eq., 257. Haynsworth v. Frierson, 11 Rich., 476. Kinsler v. Holmes, 2 S.C. 483. Edwards v. Sanders, 6 S.C. 316. Baxter v. Baxter, 23 S.C. 114. DeLoach v. Sarratt, 58 S.C. 117; 36 S.E., 532.

The order appealed from is, accordingly, affirmed.

MESSRS. JUSTICES WATTS, FRASER and MARION concur.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE GARY did not participate.


Summaries of

George H. Hurst Sons v. Rhame et al

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jan 13, 1925
130 S.C. 367 (S.C. 1925)
Case details for

George H. Hurst Sons v. Rhame et al

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE H. HURST SONS v. RHAME ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Jan 13, 1925

Citations

130 S.C. 367 (S.C. 1925)
126 S.E. 133

Citing Cases

Weatherly v. Medlin et al

Unless a judgment is to be preferred by reason of its rank, it is without preference at all under the…

Smith v. Greenville County

Mr. Wilton H. Earle, for appellant, cites: Fees: 59 S.C. 110; 66 S.C. 219. Special laws: 66 S.C. 300; 99 S.C.…