Brownlow's Knoxville Whig, and rebel ventilator. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1863-1866, 1865-10-25
PROCEEDINGS Of the Supreme COurt.

TfOCeculASS vi tlc supreme Court.
sHAeKLEFoRD, MmLIsAS AID HAWKS Pzns1prro.
Knoxville, Sept 17th, 1885.
David Whitssdo and Russell Wyatt Thomas LatAiu.
czAScEHr oAUsE-Grainssr County.
James T. Shields, for compartments.
james R. Cooke, for dsfsndsnts
shscksford, Judse-dslivsrsd tie opinion of the
Court.
Some years ago the heirs of James Mayss alsd their
petition IN the Circuit Court for the purpose Of selling
lands defendant was appointed eommssionsr-sOd the
lsnd-took the note OF the purchaser, Reuben Grove
with complainant" as hia securities Reuben Grove has
since died. A. Garrett appointed A hi, admInia
traitor. At the August Term Circuit Court 1880 of
Granger county, LEthn, commissioner, recovered
Judgment BY motion against cOmpsinants for Ss3Tl 90
This bill was fled BY compliments, and alleges the
judgment obtained By Lathn ut the instance Of
Mayse heirs, without notice thenhst motion was
mad against Garrett he sdminstrsor that execution
issued and is about be levied upon their property
That complsnants have the legal right have the I'D
nsator Of Grove included in the decree and the fact
Of the suretyship Of compsinauts rsoted in the udg
and that the surety has the legal right in every
case to have the property Of his principal exhausted be
ore his own is seized.
Latham, the commissioner, was made defendant filed
demurrer, which allowed by the COURTROOM which
the compliments have appealed.
We think there is error in the record. The purehs
sale becomes quasi part. He is party to the
record TOR the purpose of obtaining decree TO make his
purchase eecua The surees Of the purchaser become
subject TO all his sbes-are in Court, and no notice
necessary of any decree that may be rendered against
them.-5th Humphreys, l3S, and cases cited
If the Judgment in the Circuit Court erroneous
the ChanceTy Court could give reef-the party
apply the Court having Jurisdiction of the cause in
which the suit Is pending The ChEncery Court has
jurisdiction interfere with the DEGREES Of the Crcu
our exercising Ckancery powers conferred by Statute
II the eonplanan compelled pay the debt equity
will substitute them all the rights Of the principal
By section 80 81, Code Of Tennessee all parties will be
considered equally liable all cases, unless the order
liability is shown the Court of justice, and reced
IN or INDICTMENT tIDesR this il dune Chan
Gerry Court has Jurisdiction to control the plaintiff il
The collection Of his judgment decree This principle
been well settled be disturbed The decree
Of the Chancellor to be affirmed.
William Gibbs, in error, vs.. W. o. 0delI
James R. Cooke, for plaintiff, IN error.
Hall L Aiken, for defendants, in error
AIegRn, Judge-deliTered the opinion Of the COur'.
This suit commenced before Justice Of the Peace,
to dan ages fraud IN the sale OF horss
The ground Of the action s that the plaintiff IN error
falsely represented the horse be good work horse
An appeal taken Circuit Court, when after
had, there verdict and Judgment aganst plaintiff.
error and appeal prosecuted In this court II
pears from the proof that the price OF the horse agreed
upOn was hundred and fifteen dollars and the plain
tiff in error told the defendant that the Worke
we'll far SIS he had tried her which in the Osde,
the double pillow and wagoH" and in explanation Of his
habit working her the Of side, "ths she tender
mOuthed" This is all Of the testimony for present
purposes, necessary to DO noticed.
Tue Circuit Court charged the jury, "If the defendant
at the time Of sale represented The TO be good
work horse, and The plaintiff acting this assurance,
purchased the mare and sue proved not to be good
work horse, the plaintiff would be entitled to verdict in
damages
Tbs only question presented for our determination is
was this instruction correct We think The charge
not specific enough and calculated mislead the jury
The ground of the action is fraud and deceit There
IS distinction fall assertion, whether the fasehoOd
was known or unknown the made in some
dealing and calculated occasion, and ocessonng III
iurv to another is deceit in law when the falsehOOd
III - il Va
I. R., 81 q Smiths leading cases. 46 IN Law Library
But without knowledge the presence Of such facts OF
circumstances, calculated TO create reasonable
and we'll grounded that the representations are false
there eau fraud To hold otherwise would be to deny
the vendor the right in good faith to mako truthfuly
such representations Of the character habits Of the
thing sold without liability.
But in this stating the law, do not intend thereby
to weaken the Of Baker VS.. SeshOn-l Swan 81,
George vs. JohnsoE-6 Hum So and others, heretofore
announced in this State Every representation of the
thing be bona de and without the suppression OF
the truth, the suggestion Of fslsehOOd. In either
case the seller would be liable. But if she representation
the whole truth, nothing and nothing less
ability will attach such the buyer s bound
10 take notice Of representations truthfuly made
10 bim
The Judgment wiIts reversed and new trial awarded
W. C. Kain, in error, We. james ". Campbell.
LAW CAusB-Knox County.
Horace Mayn I'd, for plaintiff, in
At the October Term 1858, of the Circuit Court for
the county OF knox, CHmpDell mOuOnJ IeCOFeEcu u
Judgment against KRin for the Of l25:76, TO re
which Eain has prosecuted writ Of error 10 this
C urt The judgment is siuguIsrly defective. his is
summary proceeding in derOg. ton of the common law
and in such cases the judgment must assume in it
self . Of facts showing that Il Tss warranted by
law and it rule in such proceedings that very fact
necessary give the Court jurisdiction, must be set out
in the judgment ezIsting9th Yer, SOP; I'd Swan.
AIS; 7th Yer, 500 10th Yer, 3l0
Acus authorizing judgments upon motion must be
strictly construed and proceedings under them must be
usvanr dbl rhau IA Of Fl,E
tute-3d Hum, AIS; 18th Hum sos Sch Yer, 202 4th
Yer 1885, and they not to be extended beyond the ca
expressly provided for; although other may
"a " in he reasons for which they enaeed-2d
Hum, Is 4rh Hum, 81 Sd Hum, as.
No notice given 10 Kain Of the motion. If the
right the motion accrued than six months before
the motion made, give the Court Jurisdiction TO
pronounce Judgment in this summary manner. Notice
of the motion neeessary.-Code $685., 1851, 1889.
For these the judgment Of the Circuit Court is
erroneous, and will be reversed and the motion dsehaTg
ed. Hawkins.
R. P. Sharp in error, Vs Valentine Poland.
LAW CAUSE.
Ih0s. D. Arnold, fo- dsfendanI in error.
The record shows right Of recovery in the plaintiff,
against defendant There privity be
them The purchasers of the after maturity.
chargeabe With notice of all The equities against
The Judgment OF the Circuit Court not in the nature
Of award.
Judgment affirmed. Hawkins Judge.
Wu c. Cox vs.. Robert Wolfenbarger and Joseph Beeler
CHASCERY CAUsE-Union County.
J, r. Cooke. for complainant.
Evans, for defendants.
Complainant is entitled to have set the lost instrU
nent evidencng bis title the land. Wofenbarger
not an innocent purchaser He had constructive, if
actual notice Of the evysnd the proof raises power
ul suspicion that he had actual notice Of compliments
claim before he paid STAFFORD for the land. Respondent
does pOsitirsy fri and precisely state in his answer,
nat at the time he paid Swaford for the land, 10 had
ce Of compainauts claim therefore, the defence Of limo
cent purchaser not veil pleaded Notice Of such scs
as are sufficient to put prudent man on bis guard is
no den to b sufficient charge him with the knowledge
of ali the fcts which such investigation would have
Ii closed Complainant is entitled the relief sought
Decree armed-ezcept TO Beeler, who set titie
and had no interest. Hawkins, Judge.
September 29th, 1865.
John D. James, in error, vs.. OcOes Bank.
LAW CAUSE.
ThOs A. r. Nelson, for plaintiff, in error