Sutton v. Nelson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In ejectment in the court below, by James Nelson, the defenin error, against James Sutton, the plaintiff in error, and defendant below, for a house and lot in the town of New-Castle, a verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiff below, and were returned to this court by writ of error.
Read the full summary
In ejectment in the court below, by James Nelson, the defenin error, against James Sutton, the plaintiff in error, and defendant below, for a house and lot in the town of New-Castle, a verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiff below, and were returned to this court by writ of error. On the trial, the plaintiff offered in evidence the treasurer’s deed to him for the house and lot, made pursuant to a sale for taxes, dated the 17th JLugust, 1818, the defendant objected to it, unless it were first proved, that an assessed tax was due at the time of sale, and that a warrant of sale was…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court (Tilghman, C. J. being absent,) was delivered by
Gibson, J.
As the first point is one of as well as of the first impression; and as the second is decisive of the cause, we deem it proper to say nothing of the former, but to rest the decision on the latter alone.
*239The bond for the surplus purchase money beyond the amount of the taxes and the costs, was not given by the purchaser till two years after the execution of the deed. This is fatal. The legislature intended to make the filing of the bond and the delivery of the deed concomitant acts; for it is expressly declared…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Ash v. AshtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842
- White v. WillardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
- Turk v. M'CoySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1826