Robertson v. Tapscott's Adm'r

Citations

• 81 Va. 533
• 1886 Va. LEXIS 122

Syllabus

<p>1. Chancery Practice—Judicial Sale—Purchaser—Receiver—Estoppel—Case at bar.—Under decree in 1855 T. sold house and lot to J. W. Sale was confirmed. J. W. died. His heir, C. W., in 1860 sold itto R., the receiver in the suit, at81,500. J. W.’s estate still owed §1,292 on the purchase. Possession was given to and has ever since been kept by R., though he has not paid a cent. After many years a commissioner was appointed to look into the transactions of R. as receiver. ■ In 1883 he reported that there was in R.’s hands, as receiver, over §10,000, including $1,292, principal and §2,124.48 interest, the purchase money aforesaid. R. made no exceptions to the • report, which was confirmed ; and in April, 1883, a decree was based on this report, directing R., as receiver, to pay out this money. R., still defaulting, in April, 1884, a decree was entered directing resale of the house and lot unless in 60 days R.'should pay the purchase money. Both these decrees treated R. as the purchaser, and R. assented to them by endorsement thereon. The sale was advertised. In September, 1884, R. got an injunction upon the grounds that he bought the property of the heir of J. W., the purchaser at the judicial sale ; that C. W. contracted it to R. with covenants to perfect the title in himself and convey it free of incumbrances ; that he had not done so ; that the title was bad, and that he wanted the sale rescinded. On motion to dissolve—</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>1. R. is estopped to deny he was the purchaser, after his acquiescence in the proceedings treating him as such.</p> <p>2. If the title is bad, B. bought with knowledge of the facts. He has no standing in equity ; but must look to his covenants in a court of law.</p> <p>3. The motion for dissolution should be allowed.</p> <p>2. Idem—Injunction—Parties.—Whether injunction be awarded in a pending suit, person to be restrained must become party to the bill whereon the application is based.</p>