Warren v. Hull

The appellant asserts that he has a lien upon the real estate in controversy by virtue of a judgment obtained by him against the appellee’s husband, John H. Hull. The appellee claims that she is the equitable owner of the property, and that her right is superior to the judgment lien of the appellant.

It is the settled law of this State that a judgment is a lien on the interest the debtor has in the land, and upon nothing more. Prior equities will prevail against a judgment lien. Shirk v. Thomas, 121 Ind. 147. If it be true, as the appellee asserts, that she is the equitable owner of the land,…