Case Name: TURNER ET AL. v. MOORE ET AL.
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1921-11-04
Citations: 117 S.C. 536
Docket Number: 10745
Parties: TURNER ET AL. v. MOORE ET AL.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 117
Pages: 536–537

Head Matter:
10745
TURNER ET AL. v. MOORE ET AL.
(109 S. E. 133)
Appeal and Error—Appellants Must Show That Findings Are Against Weight op Evidence.'—The appellants must satisfy the • Supreme Court that the findings of the Circuit Judge are against 1he weight of the evidence.
Before Rice, J., Beaufort, March, 1920.
Action by Emily K. Turner et al. against Morton K. Moore and J. B. Turner. Judgment for defendants and plaintiffs appeal.
Messrs. DePass & DePass and Colcock & Colcock, for appellants,
cite: Habendum of deed to grantee in fee after the death of the grantee was insufficient to change the character of the instrument to a will: 37 S. E-, 378 (Va.) ; 10 ■Rich. Ecp, 217. Payments of a child for its parent presumed gratuitous: 132 Ala., 85; 31 S. C., 458. Parent living with child raises no implication of promise by parent to pay: 32 Atl., 286; 31 So., 454; 37 Cent. Dig., “Parent and Child,” Sec. 63 1-2. Voidable conveyance: 1 Civ. Code, 1912, Sec. 3459.
Messrs. Thomas Talbird and W. J. Thomas, for respondents,
cite: Payments from debtor to creditor will be presumed to be on the debt even though parlies are child and parent: 31 R. C. D., 126-7; 22 A. & E. Ene. L., 511; 28 A. & E. Ene. L., 769; 165 U. S., 394.
November 4, 1921.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Watts.
This was an action to set aside a conveyance for damages for alleged fraud and collusion. After issue joined the cause was finally referred to J. M. L. Kirkland, Esq., as special referee, to take testimony and report to the Court his findings in the case. Upon the coming in of his report 'exceptions were duly taken, and Judge Rice heard the cause on exceptions to referee's report, and overruled the exceptions, and sustained and confirmed the report of the referee., From the decree of Judge Rice appellants appeal, and by ten exceptions impute error.
This Court has decided in a number of cases—among others, Hickson Lumber Co. v. Stallings, 91 S. C., 473; 74 S. E., 1072, and Leland v. Morrison, 92 S. C., 501; 75 S. E., 889, Ann. Cas. 1914B, 349—that the appellants shall satisfy this Court that the findings of the Circuit Court are against the weight of the evidence. In the case at bar we have the concurring findings of both the special referee and the Circuit Judge, and the appellants have failed to convince this Court that their findings are against the weight of the evidence; and we see no error at all in the decree of his Honor.
All exceptions are overruled and judgment affirmed..