Bassett v. Lockard

Citations

• 60 Ill. 164

Syllabus

<p>1. Judicial sale — ;failure of title. Where, in a partition suit, the land was ^oun^ not susceptible of division and was sold by the master, and the proceeds partitioned, and the purchaser at that sale paid the money and received a deed from the master, hut afterwards the administrator of the ancestor of those who sought the partition died his petition for the sale of the land for payment of the debts, and under an order of the court one-half the land was sold for that purpose, on a bill filed by the purchaser at the master’s sale: Held, that he was not entitled to relief.</p> <p>2. It was held that, at a judicial sale, there is no warranty of title, and the maxim caveat emptor applies. The purchaser runs all risks'of title at such a sale. If the land descended to those seeking partition, burthened with a lien of the ancestor’s debts, he, at the master’s sale, purchased subject to have his title defeated by a sale for the payment of those debt3.</p> <p>3. SubRogatioN. In such a case there can be no subrogation, as there was no claim that could be subrogated. The lien of the creditors was discharged by the sale by the administrator, and the purchaser thereby acquired the title to the land and nothing more. There was no remaining right held by the creditors. He did not pay the money to satisfy or purchase the debts, but to buy the title to the land, which-he acquired, and nothing more. He acquired no right of the creditors which may have once existed. He purchased at the master’s sale land that was burthened with, and subject to, a lien that was capable of defeating his title, and he may have abated from the price the amount of the debts against the estate, but whether he did or not, he purchased without warranty or fraud.</p>