Carden v. Spilman
Tennessee Supreme Court
This was a hill filed in-Chancery, at Madisonville, to enforce the redemption of land sold at execution sale and purchased by respondent Spilman.' After the sale, Spilman, by contract with Hamilton, the execution debtor, obtained an. absolute deed to the land for a valuable consideration.
Read the full summary
This was a hill filed in-Chancery, at Madisonville, to enforce the redemption of land sold at execution sale and purchased by respondent Spilman.' After the sale, Spilman, by contract with Hamilton, the execution debtor, obtained an. absolute deed to the land for a valuable consideration. Carden, a judgment creditor by several judgments before a Justice of the Peace, tendered to Spilman the money bid at the sale of the land with interest; but Spilman refused to treat with him and rode off. The Court below decreed a sale of the lands to satisfy, first the amount bid at the sale; then the…
1Opinion of the Court
GREEN, J. :
The decree is unusual but less advantageous to the complainant than it should be. If he had chosen, the land ought to have been decreed to him. The refusal to treat does away with the necessity of a tender, and also of the offer required by the statute to credit the execution of complainant with the amount of ten per cent, on the amount bid at the sale. (1)
At any rate the purchaser cannot insist upon this, as it is purely for the benefit of the execution debtor. *26The debtor cannot release his equity of redemption so as to defeat other judgment creditors 'of. their right to redeem.…
2Cited by126 opinions
- State v. BlackLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1996
- Amos v. ScottCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1995
- State v. WashingtonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1997
- State v. CallahanLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1997
- Chick Springs Water Co. v. State Highway DepartmentSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1931
121 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.