Skip to main content
· 7/19/1888

McGee v. Johnson

Citations

  • 85 Va. 161
  • 7 S.E. 374
  • 1888 Va. LEXIS 22

Syllabus

<p>Creditors’ Suits &emdash;Pendente lite purchasers&emdash;Estoppel,&emdash;In 1881 H., and in March, 1882, J. against W. & Q , and in July, 1882, S. against W. alone, brought their respective bills to enforce judgments on lands alleged therein to belong to W., who answered admitting the ownership, whilst Q. failed to answer. In each suit there was a decree to rent. Commissioner reported his inability to rent for enough to pay the judgments, and in October, 1882, there was a decree in these three suits heard together to sell. In February, 1883, J. filed a supplemental bill alleging that he had just learned that these lands had, before the institution of these suits, been sold under proceedings in bankruptcy and bought by W., who still owed part of the purchase money. In these suits there was an account of liens and lands, the latter being reported as the lands of W., who was present and did not object. In April, 1883, account was confirmed and sale decreed and made in June, 1883, to J.&emdash;Q. being present and T. having notice thereof, and neither objecting. Sale was confirmed, and J. had paid half the purchase money on 18th June, 1884. . Twelve months after such payment Q., T. and W. filed their cross-bills, making all W.’s creditors parties, and charged that just after the sale in bankruptcy in 1878, W. had sold by parol, and by deed recorded in October, 1882, conveyed to Q. 93 acres, and to T. 30 acres of said land by deed recorded in November,1882, and that both had paid him the price thereof, which he had paid to his assignee in bankruptcy on the purchase money due him, and had each made improvements on said parcels of land and prayed that the decree of sale be set aside. • Defendants answered the cross-bill, denying the parol sales and the alleged payments thereon, which sales and payments were not established by evidence.</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>1. Q. and T., being pendente lite purchasers, were not necessary parties to the suits to enforce the judgments aga

Judges: Hinton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.