Turney v. Williams

Citations

• 45 Tex. 617

Syllabus

<p>1. Administrator’s sale — Caveat emptor. — The mere fact, that at the time of making an administrator’s sale of land the records of the clerk’s office in the county where the land is situate, showed that the intestate had conveyed the land in his lifetime, of which fact the purchaser had no actual knowledge, will afford no defense in a suit brought on a note given for the purchase-money.</p> <p>2. Administrator’s sale — Fraud.—At law, the rule governing a purchase at administrator’s sale is caveat emptor. In equity, if there has been such fraud or mistake in the sale as would- entitle a purchaser to relief, the burden rests on him to establish such facts. It has not been decided by this court that a mere want of title in an estate to land, at the time of an administrator’s sale, would constitute an equitable defense.</p> <p>3. Administrator’s sale — Obiter dicta. — The suggestion made in Walton v. Reager, 20 Tex., 103, that a sale by the intestate, though unknown to the administrator and to the purchaser at administrator’s sale, would constitute a fraud upon the purchaser: Held, To be obiter dicta.</p>