Perrine v. Kohr
Citations
- 20 Pa. Super. 36
- 1902 Pa. Super. LEXIS 178
Syllabus
<p>Partition — Omission of parly — Undivested interest — Sale.</p> <p>When in partition proceedings the name of a party in interest does not appear in the petition, decree and notices, unless it appears by affidavit that his name was unknown and publication made accordingly, his share of the estate will remain undivided or undivested, if there is a sale ordered, unless by some subsequent act or conduct of such party or those claiming under him, it has been ratified.</p> <p>Where a man deserts his wife and child, and goes to another part of the country, where he marries again under an assumed name, while his first wife is living, and has children by his second wife, and many years after he dies, leaving real estate, and such real estate is sold in partition proceedings instituted by the illegitimate children, and it appears that the legitimate child had no notice of the proceedings, and that her name did not appear in the petition, decree and notices, her estate is undivested by the judicial sale. Ratification of the sale cannot be inferred from the fact that about the time of her father’s death, the daughter asked a witness certain questions about her father, when the questions did not indicate that she knew the name under which her father had been living, or that she knew that her father was dead, or that he had any property in which she had an interest.</p> <p>Where real estate of a decedent has been sold in partition proceedings in the orphans’ court in proceedings instituted by the decedent’s illegitimate children on the assumption that they were his heirs, the purchasers at the sale cannot, in an action of ejectment against them by the decedent’s legitimate child, who had not been made a party to the partition proceedings, be heard to allege that a part of the proceeds of the land had been applied to the payment of decedent’s debts, and that the plaintiff could not recover the land in dispute without offering to refund the portion of the purchase money applied
Judges: Beaver, Portee, Porter, Ready, Rice
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Commonwealth v. HaylowSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1901-07-25· cited 16×
- Richards v. RoteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1871-05-18· cited 15×
- Thompson v. StittSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1868-01-07· cited 10×
- McKee v. McKeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1850-10-09· cited 6×
- Vensel's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1874-11-02· cited 2×
- Young v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1879-05-05· cited 2×
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.