Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-01-05
DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT
OFFICIAL.
Opinions of the Supreme Court OF ia
state OF Tennessee, at Knoxville, SeP-
TENDER Terms 1853.


Opinions of the Supreme Court OF ia Q
state OF Tennessee, at Knoxville, SeP-
TENDER Terms 1853.
John R. Moore and wife and others payte
TIE petitioners are the heirs of Seborn Jewel,
who died in Greene county intestate, leaving real
estate which was sold in this proceeding for parti-
ton. a house and lot in Greeneyille were sold by
the commissioner on the Sd of May 1858. under a
decree made at the February term Of the Circuit
Court. The sale was reported to the June term and
then confirmed. Between the sale and the COntrma-
ton Elizabeth Biggs, wife Of Ebert Biggs died with
out issue Upon this state facts the question arose,
and is now presented to US, whether ting husband
administrator, the brothers and sisters Of Eliza
beth. take her share of the proceeds. The Circuit
Judge decided in favor Of the husband
Ii the Conversion of the realty into the personally
was complete at die time Of her death, this would
certainly be 1TreCt In that case the property Of
the wife would be chose IN action, and a realty,
and would, consequently 60 to the husband as such
uUOn administration on her estate. In Jones vs..
Walkup. ) Snced 49, this was held to be so, where
the land of the wife had been sold under proceed
ng of this kind and the sale confirmed, although the
notes for the consideration had not been collected at
the time OF her death. We held in that case, as we
have in all aspects of the question which have come
before u.s. that these sales were complete upon the
confirmation of the report Of sale and not before This
act of the court Is necessary to change the ChaFaC
ter of the property from realty TO personally,
and without It the rights OF all parties a. 70 the
proceeds would remain if there had been no sale.
ii then the mutation Of the realty into personally
had not been accomplished by what had occurred,
at the time of the wife's death. the marital right
could not attach and the property would go to the
heirs of the wife, as the land would have done in
case no sale had been made The case Of Jones W.
Walkup, before referred to and the authorities there
cited though upon a different aspect Of the ques-
ton IS in its principle, conclusive Of this In
that case we say in relation the necessity and eff
feet of confirmation, i" This act Of the Court COM
pletes the contract and the nature Of the property
and rights of the parties instantly changed. The
purchaser is then entitled to the land, and the for
mer owner the money. II is different before confirm
alton because the sale is incomplete" The proposition
in this case is the converse of that and if
right then we must be now. If the confirmation
BY the Court be indispensable to work the change in
the nature Of the property ard the rights Of the
parties it must necessarily follow, tAat before and
without this, there is such change. So, we hold
that at the death Of Elizabeth, although her land
had been sold yet, as the sale not completed by
confirmation. the conversion had not taken place
and therefore her interest in the proceeds Of the
sale goes TO her heirs at awbeing her brothers, rs
she had no ISSUE and not to her surviving husband
The Judgment in favor of the right Of the husband
is therefore, reversed and the case remanded.
CABUTHERs.
A truc cODv Test: c. " NELSON Clerk