Case ID: ga_130/html/0536-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Holden, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Hutchinson v. Wiley, administrator.
    Submitted January 13,
    Decided April 16, 1905.
    Equitable petition. Before Judge Felton. Bibb superior court. April 16, 1907.
    B. W. Hutchinson brought suit to cancel the deeds hereinafter described, and to enjoin Mrs. Wiley, as administratrix of the estate of Mrs. M. L. Beid, from the sale of land which she was advertising for sale as property of Mrs. Beid’s estate, and from disposing of the rents from the land in her hands. A general demurrer to the petition was sustained, and the plaintiff excepted. The petition made the following allegations: The land was not property of Mrs. M.• L. Beid’s estate, but was property of the estate of her husband, W. :S. Beid, deceased. Mrs. Wiley, as administratrix, claimed that the estate of Mrs. M. L. Beid owned the land by virtue of a sheriff’s deed made to W. F. Jenkins on April 7, 1879, and under a (deed from W. F. Jenkins to M. L. Beid. The sheriff’s deed was in the usual form and recited that the land had been bid in by W. F. Jenkins for $10. The deed from Jenkins to Mrs. Beid was dated April 7, 1879, and recited a consideration of $33.80, and was without warranty of title. At the time of the sale only $33.80 was due upon the judgment under which the land was sold. The judgment was rendered at the March term, 1876, and was for the total sum of $182.10. The property sold consisted of 443 acres of land and was worth at the time of the sale $4,430. It could have been divided into lots at.the time of the sale, and a part, instead of the whole of it, could have been sold by the sheriff. The levy was grossly excessive and the sale was fraudulent and void, and neither W. F. Jenkins nor M. L. Eeid got any title by virtue of the sale or of the deeds, which show on their face that they are void. W. S. Eeid remained in possession of the land until his death, in October, 1905, and never recognized the land as the property of M. L. Eeid. He accounted to no one for the land, and sold 70 acres of it in 1899, and the purchaser went into possession. W. S. Eeid, at the time of his death, was indebted to the plaintiff, and his estate is now indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $339.06, and the land in question is the only property belonging to his estate, except $612.50, rents and profits from the land for the year 1906, which the defendant has in her possession. No administrator has been appointed on the estate of W. S. Eeid, but the plaintiff, as a creditor of the estate, has made application to be appointed permanent administrator thereon. If the defendant is not enjoined from selling the land and disposing of the rents in her hands, the petitioner and all the other creditors of the estate of W. S. Eeid will lose their claims against the estate. There is no allegation in the petition that W. S. Eeid owed the petitioner at the time of the sheriff’s sale, nor any prayer therein to subject the land to the debt.
   Holden, J.

The court committed no error in dismissing the petition in this case, upon the general demurrer thereto.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

W. ,T. Davidson, for plaintiff. John P. Boss, for defendant.