09/12/2017
An except from the South Carolina Court of Appeals where HTAS, LLC provided thorough and pervasive expert testimony. Our client case won this case on appeal.
“B. Respondents did not prove that they had complete title to the northern and southwestern portion of Lot 9.
While the Heirs of William Taylor were unable to locate a deed to the property, Respondent's never established that they owned the northern portion and southwestern portion of Lot 9. The deeds that are in Respondents' possession total only four (4) acres of property. Lot 9 consists of approximately ten (10) acres, substantially more than that prescribed in the Respondents' deeds.
Cherise Chisolm, a title researcher who had been researching titles for 18 years, was able to analyze the deeds to make a determination on the Respondent's property location. The first deed she located was a 1937 deed for four (4) acres from Josephine Taylor to Phoebe Taylor.
While the description on the deed was vague, Ms. Chisolm was able to pinpoint a starting area to the southeast corner of Lot 9 shown on the H.G. Judd Plat. Out of this deed, there were three conveyances.
According to Ms. Chisolm, when looking at the H.G. Judd Plat, the lands designated as Lot 10, owned by Ben Gardner, intersects the property on the southeast point. She also saw from the 1954 tax map that there was a public road, thereby establishing a corner for the conveyance. She started from that point and followed the deed's description, confirming that the general vicinity of the 1 1/6 acres conveyed to James Taylor would be the southeast portion of Lot 9. Ms. Chisolm confirmed that approximately four (4) acres, plus or minus, were in James Taylor or his family for Lot 9. Respondents did not submit any evidence showing that they owned all of Lot 9 and Ms. Chisolm found nothing indicating they owned all of Lot 9.
The master's ruling against the Heirs of William Taylor was based on incomplete, vague and erroneous deeds of the Respondents. Such a ruling stripped the Appellants of the property...that they had owned and occupied for generations. Therefore, the master erred in awarding all of Lot 9 to the Respondents.”
(internal citations were omitted)
Maxine TAYLOR, Respondent
2015 WL 7688341 (S.C.App.) (Appellate Brief)
Court of Appeals of South Carolina.
Maxine TAYLOR, Respondent
v.
HEIRS of William Taylor, Heirs of E. Washington, Heirs of Phoebe Taylor, Heirs of Albertha Goodwine, and all persons unknown designated as a class; Richard Roe, and Beaufort County, SC, a body politic, Defendants.,
Of whom Heirs of William TAYLOR Heirs of E. Washington, Heirs of Phoebe Taylor, and Heirs of Albertha Goodwine are the, Appellants,
Stanley TAYLOR, Joe A. Taylor and Martha T. Brown, Respondents,
v.
HEIRS OF WILLIAM TAYLOR Heirs of E. Washington, Heirs of Phoebe Taylor, Heirs of James Joseph Taylor, Heirs of Josephine Taylor and Georgia Champion, Appellants.
