McKinley v. Morgan

Citations

• 36 Wash. 561
• 79 P. 45
• 1905 Wash. LEXIS 628

Syllabus

<p>Exemptions — Findings of Bankruptcy Court — Construction— Award of Exemptions — Conclusiveness — Execution Sale of Exempt Property — Quieting Title. In an action to quiet title to lands sold to defendant under execution, and claimed by plaintiffs to have been set aside to them as exempt in a bankruptcy proceeding, the finding of the referee in bankruptcy that “the schedules of the bankrupt disclose no assets except such as are claimed exempt and found by the court to he exempt,” warrants, the trial court in finding that the property was pronounced exempt by the referee and shows sufficient title in the plaintiff; since the schedules must include all the property, and such adjudication of the bankruptcy court being conclusive, the sale of the property in the state courts under execution was void.</p> <p>Quieting Title — Possession of Plaintiff — Complaint—Sufficiency. An allegation in a complaint in an action to quiet title that the plaintiffs are entitled to the immediate possession of the property, does not make it appear that the plaintiffs are out of possession, and that ejectment is, therefore, the proper remedy.</p> <p>Quieting Title — Possession of Plaintiff — Necessity of — Estoppel — Failure to Demand Jury or Object to Form of Action. An action to quiet title will not he dismissed by the supreme court on the ground that ejectment was the proper remedy, because of the plaintiffs’ failure to allege or. prove that they were in possession or that the land was unoccupied, where the defendant answered on the merits and proceeded to trial without demanding a jury, or raising the objection in the court below.</p>