Case Name: EX PARTE LUMMUS COTTON GIN COMPANY. IN RE SAVANNAH GUANO CO. v. SANDERS ET AL.
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1921-04-13
Citations: 116 S.C. 64
Docket Number: No. 10610
Parties: EX PARTE LUMMUS COTTON GIN COMPANY. IN RE SAVANNAH GUANO CO. v. SANDERS ET AL.
Judges: Mr. Chiee Justice Gary and Mr. Justice Watts concur.
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 116
Pages: 64–77

Head Matter:
No. 10610.
EX PARTE LUMMUS COTTON GIN COMPANY. IN RE SAVANNAH GUANO CO. v. SANDERS ET AL.
(106 S. E. 861.)
1. Appeal and Error — Finding That Creditor Had No Notice op Homestead Proceedings Not Disturbed When Record on Which Exception Tried Not Before the Court. — Where a judgment creditor’s exception to proceedings to set off the judgment debtor’s homestead was tried on the record, and it is not before the Supreme Court, the finding that such judgment creditor had no notice of the proceeding connot be disturbed.
2. Homestead — Proceedings to Set Off Not Binding on Judgment Creditor Without Notice. — A Proceeding to set off an execution debtor’s homestead is not binding on a judgment creditor who had no notice of the proceeding.
3. Homestead — When Excess Over Exemption Not Paid Within 60 ■ Days, Proceedings Still Open, and Judgment Creditor Entitled to Require Reassessment. — Under Civ. Code 1912, § 3713, relative to setting off an execution debtor’s homestead when property is worth more than $1,000 and cannot be divided without injury, where the excess over $1,000 was not paid within 60 days as required by that section, but with the permission of the execution creditor was paid from time to time until paid in full, the assignment of the homestead was not complete, and it was not too late for another judgment creditor to object and require a reassessment. '
Before Bowman, J., Allendale, February term, 1920.
Affirmed.
Action by the Savannah Guano Company against T. O. Sanders and Annie D. Sanders. Judgment for plaintiff. From an order sustaining the exceptions of the hummus Cotton Gin Company to proceedings to set off defendants’ homestead, defendants appeal.
Mr. R. P. Searson, for appellants,
cites: Sec. 3711, 1 Civ. Code 1912, requires return of appraisers to be filed with the Sheriff, and Sec. 3712 gives debtor the right to have it recorded. Notice to creditors regulated: 108 S. C. 329-In 7 S. C. 171 and 7 S. C. 149 assignment had not been returned to the Sheriff. Only necessary that levying creditor, Sheriff and appraisers should know of assignment: 13 S. C. 367. Presumption of regularity in proceedings: 26 S. C. 227. Can only be rebutted by competent proof: 26 S. C. 227; 106 S. C. 454. Regulation of reassignment by other appraisers: 20 S. C. 346; Sec. 3711, 1 Civ. Code 1912. Homestead may be valid notwithstanding irregularities: 26 S. C. 101. Exceptions filed within 30 days after return was complete, were filed within time: 15 S. C. 538.
Mr. H. L. O’Bannon, for respondent,
cites: Notice to judgment creditors of proceedings for assignment of at homestead, was necessary prerequisite: 106 S. C. 453; 108 S. C. 336; 13 S. C. 366. Rule in Georgia: 68 Ga. 635; 101 Ga. 314: Notice necessary in proceedings in rem: 91 U. S. 510.
April 13, 1921.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Fraser.
The Savannah Guano Company on 4th January, 1916, obtained a judgment against the appellants herein for $1,554.26 and issued execution therefor. The Lummus Cotton Gin Company obtained judgment against the appellants on April 10, 1917, but the record fails to show that they issued execution therefor at the time. In July, 1917, the Sheriff took proceedings to set off the appellants' homestead. In November, 1917, the appraisers filed their return with the Sheriff, in which they assessed the real property of appellants at $2,750. The Sheriff then served the required notice on appellants to pay the surplus of $1,750 into his office within 60 days. Further time was given the defendants in execution by the judgment creditor, and they paid it along from time to time until the senior judgment was paid in full on November 13, 1919. On November 17, 1919, the Lummus Cotton Gin Company filed the homestead proceedings in the office of the Clerk of Court, and on November 19, 1919, filed exceptions on the ground that it had received no notice of the homestead proceedings and asked a trial de novo. Other exceptions and some affidavits were filed, but were subsequently withdrawn; so this case stands upon the one exception.
The case was tried on the record and his Honor, Judge Bowman, who. had the record before him, found as a mjatter of fact that no notice had been given the Lumnfus Cotton Gin Company, and, as the record is not before us, we cannot disturb this finding.
There being no- notice given to the judgment creditor, Lummus Cotton Gin Company, they are not bound by the proceedings. See Nixon Grocery Co. v. Spann, 108 S. C. 329, 94 S. E. 531.
Besides this, the appraisers valued the land as exceeding the homestead by $1,750. Of this due notice was given to the judgment debtor. Section 3713 provides that the excess must be paid within 60 days, and only when the excess is paid "within the time limited" shall the Sheriff refrain from selling; "that if, after notice, the party claiming the homtestead pays, or causes to be paid, the surplus over one thousand ($1,000.00) dollars, he shall, upon recording the return and receipt of the Sheriff for such surplus, indorsed on said return, as provided in precedW ing section of-this chapter, hold the property so appraised and set off, freed and discharged from all debts," etc. It is thus seen that the assignment of homestead was not complete. The matter was still open, and the respondent was in time to object and require a reassessment.
The order appealed from is affirmed.
Mr. Chiee Justice Gary and Mr. Justice Watts concur.