Biles v. Walker

Citations

• 121 Miss. 98
• 83 So. 411

Syllabus

<p>1. Appeal and Error. Court in determining the correctness of the decree of the lower court will accept the evidence of the successful party.</p> <p>Where there is a conflict in the evidence the supreme court on appeal will acept the evidence of the successful party and determine from that as to whether or not the chancellor’s decree will be upheld.</p> <p>2. Vendor and Purchaser. Bona-fide purchaser.</p> <p>Under the facts in this case as set out in its opinion the court held that there was sufficient to put the defendant on inquiry and that he was not a bona-fide purchaser for value without notice.</p> <p>3. Principal and Agent. Knowledge of purchaser's agent as to title is knowledge of purchaser.</p> <p>Notice or knowledge by an agent who is examining the title or making a purchase for a principal acquired at such time, is notice to and equivalent to knowledge by such buyer.</p> <p>4. Estoppel. Giving agent apparent title to property not to he urged ty purchaser with knowledge.</p> <p>The rule that equity will not relieve the principal who has voluntarily placed the title to his land in his agent, where another must suffer by reason of such fraudulent act does not apply where the purchaser had knowledge of all the facts, or sufficient facts which, if followed up, would place him in possession of all the facts as to the real ownership of land.</p> <p>5. Estoppel. That purchaser took land in name of agent in order to sell more readily for tetter price not in itself fraudulent.</p> <p>The fact that a real estate agent took the title to purchased land in the name of his agent solely for the reason that he could more readily sell the property, or sell it at a better price than if in his own name, was not in itself unlawful, or fraudulent.</p>