Hare v. Bedell
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
October 6th 1881. Before Merour, Gordon, Paxson, Trunkey, Sterrett and Green, JJ. Sharswood, O. J., absent. Error to the Court of Common Pleas No. 1. of Allegheny county: Of October and November Term 1881, No. 128. Assumpsit, by John Ii. liare, sheriff of Allegheny county for use of Joel Bedell, for use of Margaret J. Bedell, against Á. W..
Read the full summary
October 6th 1881. Before Merour, Gordon, Paxson, Trunkey, Sterrett and Green, JJ. Sharswood, O. J., absent. Error to the Court of Common Pleas No. 1. of Allegheny county: Of October and November Term 1881, No. 128. Assumpsit, by John Ii. liare, sheriff of Allegheny county for use of Joel Bedell, for use of Margaret J. Bedell, against Á. W.. Bedell, to recover the difference between the price for which certain land was sold to the defendant at sheriff’s sale, the terms of which he did not comply with, and the amount which the said land brought at a subsequent sheriff’s sale. On the trial,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sterrett
It is very clear that a defaulting purchaser at sheriff’s sale is not liable to respond in damages for loss on re-sale of the property, if it appears that under the first sale he would have acquired a more valuable title than that which passed to the purchaser at the last sale, or that the terms of the first sale were more advantageous to the purchaser than those of the re-sale. The obvious reason of this is,' that the inferior quality of title, or the less advantageous terms of sale, would naturally effect a reduction of price, and we would be left without any reliable *488standard by which to…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Pepper v. DeakyneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Ramsay v. HerskerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Clever v. CleverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Bruff v. StoopsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1918