Case Name: SCARBOROUGH v. REGISTER
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1923-02-26
Citations: 123 S.C. 59
Docket Number: 11142
Parties: SCARBOROUGH v. REGISTER
Judges: Messrs. Justices Watts and Fraser concur.
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 123
Pages: 59–61

Head Matter:
11142
SCARBOROUGH v. REGISTER
(116 S. E., 97)
Specific Performance—Remedy Will Not Be Awarded Where Contract Speculative.—Specific performance of a contract for the sale of land will not be enforced where the contract was speculative.
Before Mauedin, J., December, 1921.
Reversed.
Action by W. R. Scarborough and' W. R. Shaw against J. R. Register. Decree for plaintiffs and defendant appeals.
Messrs. Miller & Lawson, for appellant,
cite: Specific performance will not be decreed in respect of an undivided interest in lands: 6 Pom. Eq. Jur., Sec. 767. Description must be definite: 25 R. C. B., 220; 36 Cyc., 592; 2 A. L. R., 118; 38 R. P A. (N. S.) 331; 47 L. R. A., 334; 76 A- D- R-, 826; lb Am. Dig., 480; 67 N. E., 384; 70 Pac., 805; 86 N. W., 1082; 71 Pac., 657; 105 Pac., 76; 83 AH, 189; 164 S. W., 593; 24 B. Ed., 494 ; 38 S. C., 404. Speculative contract will not be enforced: 114 S. C., 245; 119 S. C., 78. Vendor was due to pay off mortgage to give clear title: 99 S. C., 88; 1 DeS., 382; 35 S. C., 326; 51 S. C., 5.59; 57 S. C, 131; 6 Rich. Eq., 324; 25 R. C. R., 277. 'No deed tendered: 3 Hill 274'; 5 Rich., 254; 6 Rich., 197; Chev., 149; 2 Rich. 361; 3 Rich., 261. Laches: 111 S. C., 376; 117 S. C., 479; 43 S. C., 441. Defendant could cancel, plaintiff being in default: 24 A. & E. Ene. R, 643; 1 S. C., 273; 28 S. C., 224; 37 R. Ed., 630; 53 .S. C., 573. Original vendor proper party: 36 Cyc., 767, 768. No privity between parties: 36 Cyc., 574.
Messrs. McLeod & Dennis, Thos H. Tatum and R. W. McLendon, for respondent,
cite: Tender unnecessary where futile: 109 S. E., 406.
February 26, 1923.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Marion.
Appeal from a decree of Hon. T. J. Mauldin, Circuit Judge, ordering and requiring the specific performance of a contract for the sale of land. The defendant set up the defense that the contract was "speculative." The essential facts of the case cannot be distinguished from those of the .case of Sumner v. Bankhead, 119 S. C., 78, 111 S. E., 891, to which facts this Court applied the doctrine announced in the case of Schmidt v. Whitten, 114 S. C., 245, 103 S. E., 553. The individual views of the writer are in entire accord with those so clearly and forcefully presented in the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Cothran in the case of Sumner v. Bankhead, supra. But the view adopted in Schmidt's and Sumner's Cases, and adhered to by a majority of the members of this Court, is the law of this jurisdiction, and that law very clearly rules the decision of this appeal.
It is accordingly ordered and adjudged that the decree of the Circuit Court be reversed, and the complaint dismissed. Reversed.
Messrs. Justices Watts and Fraser concur.
Mr. Justice Cothran did not participate.
Mr. Justice Gary did not sit.