Bramlett v. Wetlin
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the chancery court of Wilkinson county. Hon. Claude Pintard, Chancellor. The land in controversy was owned by J. H. Jones, who sold it, in 1887, to Leak on credit, taking notes for the price, and expressly reserving a lien for their payment.
Read the full summary
From the chancery court of Wilkinson county. Hon. Claude Pintard, Chancellor. The land in controversy was owned by J. H. Jones, who sold it, in 1887, to Leak on credit, taking notes for the price, and expressly reserving a lien for their payment. The notes he assigned to Lindenmayer, who in turn transferred them to appellee, Wetlin, both transfers being prior to the adoption of the code of 1892. There was an unsatisfied enrolled judgment for about ninety dollars against Leak, and when he bought the land it became subject, secondarily, to such judgment. In 1893 Bramlett, the appellant, entered…
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, C. J.
Bramlett was neither a subsequent creditor nor pui’chaser, within the meaning of § 2461 of the code of 1892. The statute has reference to one who becomes a creditor of the holder of the subject of the lien subsequent to the assignment not noted on the record, or a purchaser for value without notice of the subject of the lien after the assignment. By purchasing, Bramlett got the right of the judgment creditor only, and he was not a subsequent creditor, but a pi’ior one; and by purchasing at the sale under the execution he acquired no higher right, for it has been often decided in this state…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Bell v. Union & Planters' Bank & Trust Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1930
- Richter Phillips Co. v. PhillipsMississippi Supreme Court · 1936
- Drane v. NewsomMississippi Supreme Court · 1895