Huggins v. Oliver

Citations

• 21 S.C. 147
• 1884 S.C. LEXIS 83

Syllabus

<p>1. In action by a purchaser of an intestate’s lands under judgment obtained against the administrator, such judgment is conclusive upon the heirs at law, of their intestate’s indebtedness, and of all issues involved in that adjudication.</p> <p>2. Under a judgment against an administrator, which technically was not in proper form, the lands of the intestate were sold, and the purchaser brought action against the heirs for a recovery of such land. A few days before the trial, the plaintiff, on ex parte application to the Circuit judge at chambers, with consent of the administrator, obtained order amending the judgment according to the right of the case. Held, that the amendment was properly allowed and related back to the sale of the land.</p> <p>3. Lands of an intestate may be sold under a judgment recovered against his administrator upon a debt of the intestate, but if the lands have passed into the actual and exclusive possession of the heirs before the judgment was recovered, they cannot be sold under such judgment. Oases reviewed.</p> <p>4. Partition is conclusive evidence of actual possession under a claim of exclusive right asserted by the heirs, but it is not the only evidence. Such claim may be shown by other facts and circumstances.</p> <p>5. A purchaser of the lands of an intestate under judgment against the administrator, brought action against the widow of intestate, and the vendee of such purchaser recovered the possession. Action was then brought by the widow and other heirs of intestate against such vendee for the recovery of this land. Held, that the widow was estopped by the judgment had in the action against her, but that the others were not, they not being parties or privies.</p>