Case ID: ga_196/html/0649-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Grice, Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Hill et al. v. Beazley et al.
    
    No. 14636.
    October 5, 1943.
   Grice, Justice.

B. and others, alleging themselves to be joint owners with certain named persons as the heirs at law of Mrs. A., filed a petition for partition. The parties named by petitioners as joint owners filed an answer, in which they asserted title, and prayed that the petition be denied. This issue was submitted to a jury, who found in favor of the petitioners, and that the land be partitioned. No motion to set aside this verdict was made. A judgment was entered in accordance therewith appointing commissioners, who were ordered to sell the property. After the sale the commissioners filed a report in the cause, addressed to the judge, stating that they had sold to B. the land mentioned; and that the money had been deposited in a certain bank in the name of the commissioners; that it appeared that G had been appointed administrator of the estate of Mrs. A., and that there were tax executions against the property. Direction was asked of the court, whether the proceeds could be turned over to the administrator of the estate of Mrs. A., for the purpose of distribution. Those named as joint owners in the original petition filed objections to the return of the partitioners, asserting that at the time of the sale the administrator of Mrs. A. had pending an application for leave to sell the land, which application was pending; that said sale was a legal fraud, for the reason that there existed a valid obligation of Mrs. A. at the time of the sale; that “prospective bidders were chilled by said obligation and by the said application for leave to sell;” and that “said property would have brought a greater sum but for said fact.” These objections were dismissed, and error is assigned. Held, that no error appears in that ruling.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

J. A. Mitchell, for plaintiffs in error.

Osgood O. Williams, contra.