Freer v. Tupper

Citations

• 21 S.C. 75
• 1884 S.C. LEXIS 74

Syllabus

<p>1. There is always a presumption in favor of legal process, regular in form.</p> <p>2. Under a decree óf foreclosure which ascertained the amount due on a mortgage, directed a sale, and authorized execution to be issued for the deficiency, an execution might issue for the deficiency when ascertained, without fui'ther order of the court. This case distinguished from Warren v. Raymond, 12 S. C., 9.</p> <p>3. There being some presumptive evidence of a sale of the mortgaged premises before execution issued, the judge could not order a non-suit ; a verdict based upon the existence of such prior sale not disturbed.</p> <p>4. Where a decree of foreclosure ordered land of one county to be sold in another, and execution to be issued for the deficiency after such sale, frSm which decree no appeal was taken, and subsequently the defendant made default to a summons requiring him to show cause why the execution issued in the case should not be renewed, neither he nor his vendee can dispute the title of a purchaser who bought under such renewed execution. McNair v. Ingraham, ante, 70, approved.</p> <p>Mr.. Justice McIver concurred in result.</p>