.. 990

Pennsylvania.
$ 1859 Confirmation of report.

755 $ 1865. Prepayment of damages

755 $ 1866. Suit for damages

755 Statutes. $ 3531. Mechanic's lien

898 1794. April 19 (3 Smith's Laws, p. 143).

3539. Continuance of lien

898 Revocation of wills 951 4456. Estate vests in seven years.

738 1851, April 3 (P. L. 327). Opening of

$ 4470. Actions for injuries to property.. 738 streets

791

$ 5096. Forcible entry and detainer 738 1879, June 4 (P. L. 88). Wills

950

$ 5103. Merits of title not inquired into 745 $ 5131. Replevin

286 Rhode Island. $ 5144. Judgment for defendant

286 6437. Misdemeanor

293 Public Laros.

$$6786, 6787. Furnishing liquors to

minors

292 1898, 1899, chap. 549. p. 49. Consent $ 6789. Punishment for giving liquors to of guardian to mar

minors

292 riage 1938 7202. Sentence to penitentiary

293 8 7212 Assessment of fine

293 General Laws, 1896. Chap 196, $ 7. Appointment of guardian 493

Texas.
of
Chap. 196, $ 16. Invalidity

ward's
493

Statutes.
Chap. 279, $ 65. Observation of street
railway tracks.

19u 1840, Jan, 20. Adoption of common law.. 990

Paschal's Digest.
South Carolina.
Art. 1870. Indictment for bribery

183 Constitution.

Revised Statutes, 1895. Art. 2, $ 24. Elections by general as Art. 1689. Descent and distribution 990 sembly

187 Art. 3258 Adoption of common law South Dakota.

White's Annotated Code of Criminal

Procedure.
Laws.

$ 766.

Practice as to improper argument 200 190:3, chap. 176. p. 202. Board of Medical examiners

West Virginia.
Revised Justices' Code.

Code, 1899. $$ 14, 15. Service of summons..

301

Chap. 53, § 59. Dissolution of corporaTennessee.

tion

137 Chap 54, $ 26. Building associations. 421

Lien

Chap. 75, 8 8.
Constitution.

129 Art. 1, § 21. Compensation for property

Wisconsin. taken

731 Art. 2, § 17. Bills to embrace but one

Statutes. subject

731

1899, chap. 245, p. 407. Trustees of counStatutes.

ty poor

831 1879, chap. 11. p. 15. Establishment of

Revised Statutes, 1878.
taxing district.... 752
15:09. chap. 14,

p. 250.
Condemnation $ $ 1045, 1046.

Entries on assessment
ot
land
for park

rolls

459 purposes

7JI

Revised Statutes, 1898.
Shannon's Code.

600. Coliection of cost of support of $ 1814. Taking land for internal im

insane

persons. 830 provement 755 600e. Rendition of accounts.

831 $ 1845. Petition for appropriation of land 755 604g. Collection of cost of support from $ 1846. Notice of petition

755

.....505

LAWYERS

REPORTS

ANNOTATED.

KENTUCKY COURT OF APPEALS.

R. B. COWPER, Appt.,

of

the Circuit Court for Livingston CounD. B. WEAVER'S ADMINISTRATOR. ty holding him responsible for a bid made at

a judicial sale. Reversed. (........ Ky.........)

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Messrs. Hendrick & Miller and J. C. A court order annulling a judicial sale, Hodge for appellant. and directing a resale of the property, with

Messrs. Bush & Wilson and C. C. out accepting the bid, or directing any pro

Grassham for appellee. ceedings against the bidder, or any confirmation of the sale, relieves him from all liabil. ity upon his bid.

Hobson, J., delivered the opinion of the

court: (January 10, 1905.)

D. B. Weaver died a resident of LivingXOTE.—Relief of purchaser upon annulling ju in CowPER V. WEAVER'S ADMR. As to whether dicial or execution sale.

or not he may claim release if the sale is not

confirmed, the case of CowPER v. WEAVER'S I. Release from bid, 33.

ADMR, holds that he is released, saying: “The II. Release from bid and return of deposit, 36. purchaser at the first sale was only a preferred III. Relief by reimbursement or subrogation. bidder until his bid was accepted by the court a. Generally, 39.

confirming the sale." But in a case in the D. Reinibursement, 39.

United States Supreme Court (Camden v. MayC. Subrogation.

hew, 129 U. S. 73, 32 L. ed. 608, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1. Generally, 42.

246), he was held not released; but the court 2. Out of proceeds of resale, 44. offered to confirm the sale if he would pay, and d. Probate, guardians', and administra

an order was made to fix his liability when the tors' sales.

subsequent sale was ordered. Judicial sales 1. Guardians' sales, 45.

differ from execution sales, in that in the 2. Administrators' sales, 47.

former a confirmation is necessary to fix the e. Statutory relief, 51.

liability of the purchaser. Some states have f. Proceedings against nonresidents, 52.

a statutory provision for the confirmation of all 8. Fraudulent sales, 53.

sales. The purchaser will be released if the Il Relief by action against the debtor, 55.

conditions in the second sale vary from those V. Relief by action against the creditor, 56.

in the first sale. If the sale is void the purVI. Relief by action against the sheriff, 58.

chaser will be released from his bid (see subdiv. VII. Summary, 58.

III.). He will be released by the court in

judicial sales which are set aside on the ground I. Release from bid.

that the title is doubtful (see subdiv. II.). He

has been released on the ground of poverty. It is il necessary result that a purchaser is

So, where no notice was given or rule taken released from his bid on the sale being set aside.

against the purchaser at a sheriff's sale, that a So the converse is also true, and a release from the bid will, in effect, set the sale aside. This

resale would be at his risk, he was held justi. note is only intended to include such cases as

fied in regarding his purchase as abandoned. show, in effect, that the sales were set aside or

Galpin v. Lamb, 29 Ohio St. 529. treated as invalid. In many cases a resale was

The same was held in Girard L. Ins. Co. v. had because the purchaser failed to comply

Young, 8 Phila. 16, the court saying: “Surely

if, after such a sale, the property is again put with his bid, and proper steps were taken to hold him for a deficiency where the sale was not

up without any demand on the part of the set aside. The reason for holding him liable

sheriff or anyone else for the performance of is on the theory that his purchase is binding,

the contract, and without any notice or intimaand he has caused loss by his delinquency. The

tion that the purchaser is to be held responrule is that where proper steps are not taken to

sible for the loss, on a resale, he may fairly fix the purchaser's liability, and a resale is had, infer that his bid is not insisted on, that his he will be released; and it may be stated that compliance with it has been waived." where he is led to believe that the first sale In Makeinson v. Braun, 100 Ky. 88, 37 S. W. has been abandoned, and another sale is had, 495, the purchaser refused to execute bonds. he will not be liable. This was the rule adopted and the conimissioner, without reporting to the 09 L. R. A.

3

33

ston county, and his administrator brought, appearing to the court by report of the masthis suit to sell the land owned by him for ter commissioner, W. I. Clarke, that he sold the payment of debts, and for the settlement to R. B. Cowper lots 67, 68, 69, 70, and 71, of his estate. At the April term, 1903, a and a part of outlot No. 17, as appears on judgment was entered directing a sale of the town plat of Smithland, Kentucky, and the real estate. The sale was made on June said Cowper having failed and refused to ex1st, and at it appellant, R. B. Cowper, bid ecute bonds therefor, and said fact being in lots 67, 68, 69, 70, and a part of lot 17, made known to this court as aforesaid, the for $265. After the sale he seems to have said commissioner is here directed to treat concluded that the title of the intestate to said sale to Cowper as if it had not been the land was not good, and refused to ex- made, and readvertise said property for sale, ecute a bond for the price. The commis- and sell same in the full way and manner sioner on September 9th filed his report of set out and directed in the judgment filed sale, stating that Cowper had purchased herein, and will in all respects comply with the property at the sale, and had refused to said judgment in taking bond, making re. execute a sale bond. On this report on Sep- port, and so forth and so on, as herein set tember 25th the court, without taking any out; and this cause is continued.” The re. proceedings against Cowper or confirming sale was made on November 2, 1893, and at the sale, entered the following order: “It it the property brought the sum of $32. court, readrertised and sold the property, which court is the vendor, and there is no completed sale was confirmed. Subsequently a rule was sale until confirmation by the court, which is issued against the first purchaser to show cause the acceptance of the bidder's offer." why he should not be required to pay a de- And a motion that a person reported best ficiency arising between the sales. It was held purchaser should complete his purchase by a that, as the commissioner bad elected to treat certain day was refused; the report not being the first purcbase as a nullity, and reported all absolutely confirmed. Anonymous, 2 Ves. Jr. his acts to the court, and no steps were taken 335. The lord chancellor said: "He felt a to compel the purchaser to comply with his pur- | difficulty ; as until confirmation, the purchaser chase, but, instead, the last sale was confirmed, is always liable to have the biddings opened ; the rule was taken too late, and the purchaser until that, non constat that he is the purwas released.

chaser." And in Stout v. Philippi Mfg. & M. Co. 41 And in Campbell v. Johnston, 4 Dana, 178, W. Va. 339, 56 Am. St. Rep. 843, 23 S. E. 571, the court said: “Although in general the purwhere, by consent of the parties, it was agreed chaser under an erroneous decree in chancery that there should be a resale, and the same inay not be affected by the reversal of the de. purchaser purchased at the second sale at a less cree, yet, as was determined by this court in the price, and the first sale was not confirmed, or case of Forman v. Hunt, at the last spring term. reported until after the second sale, it was held 3 Dana, 614, such sales are not complete until that he was not liable for the deficiency. In they are sanctioned by the court." this case the property was injured by a freshet So, in Harwood v. Cox, 26 Ill. App. 374, the between the sales, although this was not plead. court said: "The accepted bidder at a master's ed in the proceedings to hold the purchaser sale acquires no independent right to have his liable. The court said: “But, without report purchase completed, but is nothing more than a of this bid, or its acceptance by the court, or preferred bidder, who proposes for the purchase intimation of a purpose to hold him to his bid, of the property, depending upon the sound, the property is resold, by mere act of the at- equitable discretion of the chancellor for a contorneys of the parties, without advertisement. | firmation of the sale by his ministerial agent." As all parties consented to a resale, Douglass And in Gowan v. Jones, 10 Smedes & M. 161, could fairly infer that they recognized the in

the court said : "In chancery, some reports are justice of confirming the sale, and agreed to dis- conclusive, and others require confirmation. regard it."

Among the latter, is the report allowing the În Mississippi it was held that no liability highest bidder at a sale under a decree to be attaches to the first purchase until after the sale

the purchaser." is confirmed ; that, if the purchaser refuses to

So, in Mebane v. Mebane, 80 N. C. 34, the pay, and the commissioners advertise and resell

court said: "The bid is but a proposition to at a lower price, without reporting to the court until after a second sale, which is contirmed, buy, and, until accepted and sanctioned by the the purchaser will not be held liable for the

court, confers no right whatever upon the purdeficiency. Campe v. Saucier, 68 Miss. 278, 24

chaser. The sale is consummated when that Am. St. Rep. 273, 8 So. 846.

sanction is given and an order for title made In regard to the necessity of a confirmation

and executed." to hold the purchaser, in Virginia F. & M. Ins.

In Forman v. Hunt, 3 Dana, 614, the commisCo. v. Cottrell, 85 Va. 857, 17 Am. St. Rep. 108, sioner in a foreclosure sale, supposing that the 9 S. E. 132, the court said : "Until the sale