Lessee of Samms v. Alexander
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Ejectment for 100 a acres in East Bethlehem township. The plaintiff claimed under a warrant of 8th March 1786, and a survey thereon made 30th September 1787. The defendant claimed under a judgment obtained against Samms, in March term 1787, a fieri facias to July term 1787, whereon the lands were levied, and a sale by James Marshall, esq. then sheriff, under a venditioni exponas to October term 1787. William Wallace, esq. the succeeding sheriff, by order of the Court of…
Read the full summary
Ejectment for 100 a acres in East Bethlehem township. The plaintiff claimed under a warrant of 8th March 1786, and a survey thereon made 30th September 1787. The defendant claimed under a judgment obtained against Samms, in March term 1787, a fieri facias to July term 1787, whereon the lands were levied, and a sale by James Marshall, esq. then sheriff, under a venditioni exponas to October term 1787. William Wallace, esq. the succeeding sheriff, by order of the Court of Common Pleas, executed the deed to the defendant, in consideration of 10L, February 8th, 1792. The plaintiff proposed to…
1Opinion of the Court
The court said, it was impossible to receive such evidence, however hard the case might appear. If sheriffs’ sales could be avoided by such objections, it would produce the most fatal consequences. The defendant had paid his money, without being apprized of any dispute, confiding in the regularity of the court proceedings.' If indeed Stokeley, the plaintiff, had bought at the sheriff’s sale, this evidence might have been gone into, according to the authority of Goodyer v. Junce, Yelv. 179; but *it is clearly otherwise as to a stranger. The lessor of the plaintiff had ample time to move the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Arnold v. GorrSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1829
- Caldwell v. WaltersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1851