Coat v. Coat

Citations

• 63 Ill. 73

Syllabus

<p>1. Administrator’s sale oe land—purchase for administrator. On bill by the heirs to set aside a sale of land of their ancestor bjr au administrator for the payment of debts, it appeared that the land was struck off to the bidder to whom the deed was made; that he never paid any part of the purchase money, or gave any security for its payment; that he was never called on for the amount of his bid or any part of it; that he never exercised any act of ownership over it, or paid any taxes or received any rent; that from the pretended sale the administrator received the rents, paid all the taxes aud made various improvements on the premises: Held, that these facts showed that the purchase was made for the administrator, notwithstanding the testimony of the purchaser that, to the best of his recollection, there was no such agreement:</p> <p>2. Same—terms of setting aside. On bill by heirs to set aside an administrator’s sale of lands, on the. ground that the administrator was interested as the real purchaser, where no money was paid or secured to be paid, the court, in setting aside the sale, refused to • allow the administrator the amount of his claim allovred against the estate and other claims paid by him, but charged him with rents and profits received by him: Held, no error, and that the land was still liable to be sold for the payment of all just claims allowed in the manner pointed out in the statute. Had the purchaser paid money to the administrator, the rule would have been otherwise.</p>