Case ID: pa_132/html/0383-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam :", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

T. F. SHANNON v. CHAS. WALKER ET AL.
    APPEAL BY PLAINTIFF FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY.
    Argued February 7, 1890
    Decided February 17, 1890.
    To a bona fide purchaser at sheriff’s sale of lands subsequently in dispute in ejectment, § 9, act of 1705, 1 Sm. L. 61, is a complete protection against every defect or irregularity, except when the delect or irregularity appears upon the face of the judgment upon which the land was sold : Shannon v. Newton, ante 375.
    Before Paxson, C. J., Sterrett, Green, Clark, Williams, McCollum and Mitchell, JJ.
    No. 130 January Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 20 March Term 1889, C. P.
    On December 12, 1888, Thomas F. Shannon, committee of Mary Dalfonza, a lunatic, brought ejectment against Charles Walker and Emily Y. Cowden, to recover a house and lot on Lafayette street, Norristown. Issue.
    At the trial on October 22, 1889, the plaintiff put in evidence title in Antonio Dalfonza, deceased, the husband of Mary Dalfonza, the lunatic, the will of said deceased devising the property in dispute to Mary Dalfonza, and, to show his title as committee, an inquisition of lunacy of date May 23,1888, finding Mary Dalfonza a lunatic. Showing possession by defendant, the plaintiff rested.
    Defendants then offered the record of a judgment for $250 entered May 13,1884, in the name of Emily V. Cowden against Mary Dalfonza, on a bill single dated April 11, 1884, with warrant of attorney and with waiver of inquisition ; fieri facias thereon issued to October Term 1887; condemnation on inquisition approved; venditioni exponas to December Term 1887, sheriff’s sale of the property in dispute to the plaintiff for $100 on November 23, 1887, deed made, dated December 12, 1887, and possession taken thereunder. Objected to. Objections overruled, offers admitted; exceptions.1 2
    In rebuttal, the plaintiff offered in evidence the record of the proceedings in lunacy; also, testimony that the defendant in the judgment was a lunatic at the time the judgment bond was given and entered; also, the order of court committing the lunatic to the state asylum, dated July 1, 1889. Objected to. Objections sustained, offers refused; exceptions.3 4 5
    After other offers made and refused, the case was closed on the testimony, w'hen the court, Swartz, P. J., instructed the jury to find a verdict for the defendants.9
    The jury having returned a verdict for the defendants, as directed, judgment was entered, when the plaintiff took this appeal assigning for error:
    1, 2. The admission of defendants’ offers.1 8
    3, 4, 5. The refusal of plaintiff’s offers.3 4 5
    9. The instruction to find for defendants.9
    
      Mr. G. R. Fox, Jr. (with him Mr. G. R. Fox), for the appellant.
    Counsel cited: Hope v. Everhart, 70 Pa. 231; Commonwealth v. Green, 4 Wh. 568; Richards v. Rote, 68 Pa. 252; McKee v. McKee, 14 Pa. 237; Ragan’s Est., 7 W. 440; Rogers v. Walker, 6 Pa. 371; Warden v. Eichbaum, 14 Pa. 127; Wirebach v. Bank, 97 Pa. 543.
    
      Mr. William F. Solly (with him Mr. Henry Freedley), for the appellees.
    Counsel cited: Section 9, act of 1705, 1 Sm. L. 61; Arnold v. Gorr, 1 R. 226; Warder v. Tainter, 4 W. 270; Feger v. Keefer, 6 W. 297; Duff v. Wynkoop, 74 Pa. 306; Henry v. Brothers, 48 Pa. 71.
   Per Curiam :

This case is ruled by Shannon v. Newton, just decided, ante, 375.

Judgment affirmed.