Case Name: GROCE v. GROCE ET AL.
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1925-05-06
Citations: 131 S.C. 416
Docket Number: 11760
Parties: GROCE v. GROCE ET AL.
Judges: Mr. Chiee Justice Gary and Messrs. Justices Fraser and Marion and Mr. Acting Associate Justice Jas. W. Johnson concur.
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 131
Pages: 416–419

Head Matter:
11760
GROCE v. GROCE ET AL.
(127 S. E., 719)
Messrs. Bonham, Price & Poag, W. M. Walters and T. H. Munro, for appellant,
Messrs. Bomar, Osborne & Brown and Haynsworth & Haynsworth, for respondents,
May 6, 1925.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Watts.
The decree of Judge Townsend is satisfactory to this Court under the authorities quoted by him (Dicks v. Cassels, 100 S. C., 341; 84 S. E., 878. Kerr v. Kennedy, 105 S. C., 496, 500, 505; 90 S. E., 177. Joyner v. Hoffman, 59 S. C., 535; 38 S. E., 174), and also Cromwell v. Simons (C. C. A.), 280 F., 663; 671. Van Horn v. Demarest, 76 N. J. Eq., 386; 77 A., 354. Bolling v. Bolling's Adm'r, 146 Ky., 316; 142 S. W., 387, Ann. Cas., 1913C, 306. Armstrong's Adm'r v. Shannon, 177 Ky., 547; 197 S. W., 950, and it is incumbent that the appellant should satisfy this Court of the correctness of his contention by the preponderance of the evidence, which he has failed to do.
It is the judgment of this Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court be affirmed.
Mr. Chiee Justice Gary and Messrs. Justices Fraser and Marion and Mr. Acting Associate Justice Jas. W. Johnson concur.
Mr. Justice Cothran did not participate.