Brownlow's Knoxville Whig. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1866-1869, 1866-06-06


to- and thereafter Compliments g. NJ and f. B. Fogg were
directed by deed of the Circuit Court of the United States for
tract of land Pasche and others and after
wards on the 18th day of December 1882 they sold said lands
which Rogers their $780, each due the lt
FaT 4 ls03 and is rsPectssy and payable 70 g.
stitute lien upon the land-ths the purchase money
having been paid G. NJ and F. B. Fogg have conveyed
said land Rogers the legal thereto in
tnetht Rogers has also sold the last mentioned lands to
The bill alleges that on the day April 1857 Ro-
gers executed conveyance trust to complainant C. M
foeg o. number Of slaves and other property consisting
OF stock wagons etc. to the payment Of said debts
as are informed has been duly recorded
etc. Complainant alleges said last mentioned
ance was made without consultation and in fact without
their knowledge and that complainant Gibbs knew nothing of
and the nrst any OF them knew of it, when sometime
alter Its execution Rogers copy it complainant c.
in recognizing said deed of trust they intended
and do intend to release any lien upon
cury for the payment Of the parchse money Complainant
Gibbs alleges he has had nothing to do with the deed
and has always looked to the land in White
for the payment of the notes. 600 each Rogers
Wh tne @ 70 wnom ne has sold the lands IN
sold the lands in Fenress county, parties
bseeks sale of the property conveyed to G. NJ Fogg in
appropriation pro the proceeds thereof to
the satisfaction of said debts and the said lands for
the payment of the balance of the purchase money any
mains due after the sale of the property conveyed
The purchasers Of portions of the different from
Rogers have filed the demurrers to the bill and assign
| causes of demurrer
1 LIST That the bill is multifarious
ID That compliments their liens upon the
lands for the payment of the purchase money.
4 =
| to the land in Fentress county.
Defendant Rogers files demurrer in which
he assigns substantially the same of demurrer
The Chancellor sustained the demurrers and ordered that
compliments bill be dismised-to which complain
We think the decree of the Chancellor This
held the of Gillespie Bradford, 16s that
Since the English Court of Chancery first assumed urisdc
ton BY BILL and subp@ned to enforce for the sale
land specie the vendor has been deprived of his legal
title without having received the purchase When
the vendor the land the purchaser deed
law creates lien upon the land so convened in favor Of the
| lien
may be waived by ;he VENDOR and nc separate
dependent security the payment of the purchase money
whether be mortgage other estates the pledge
goods the personal responsibilities of third person.
thereby gives abandonment or waiver of his
lien upon the conveyed premises for indemnity
only dca evidence Of the waiver and may be repealed
Marshall Christian, Hump. 6ls 69 Campbellvs Bald
win ct ais 2.Hump 2s The compliments in their bill
the mortgage waive their liens upon the land but have
purchase that the vendors had conveyed the land
Rogers by deeds the demurres for this cannot be
never conveyed lands retained the title
ry the payment of the purchase and believed
may additional different and Independent
rites for his indemnity without abandoning waving
rendering the security thus retained and in this the
different from those in which the vendor has
veyed to the purchaser Upon what authority or process of
waived his right security of his indemnity which, for the
purpose indemnity he has retained in his hands The
lien Gibbs upon the land in White county by virtue Of
assignment of the notes. passed to NJ FogS, the assignee
As TO what does or does not constitute usriousness this
court of johnson Brown Hump 327 ap
proved the remarks of Justice Story, a
the upon this subject, principle be extracted
from them that safely adhered general rue
the must determine each upon its peculiar
| circumstances; while multiplicity of actions the
hand ought avoided should be careful the other
guard against that complication and confusion in the in
vesgaton rights and the application remedies arising
from the attempt blend in suit distinct and ncongru
claims and liabilities The interest and liabilities of de-
PENDANTS be separate yetf they radiae from
CENTER they be Joined in the suit-and by
ton 1927 of Code IS provided the uniting bill
of several Of equity distant and unconneced against
one defendant not nuariousness 1t cannot be insisted
that the lands in White county IN the hands of Rogers
those whom he has conveyed the not liable to the
the in the hands Gibbs Fogg his
gneeneher 1t be insisted the lands in Fentres county,
the hands Of Rogers those whom he have
ed liable the satisfaction of given by
Rogers c. NJ FOgg is conceded however, that the
of the mortgage by Rogers FOgg
payment of the purchase due for both tracts
connecting the transactions concerning the two tracts
of land parties interested each but certainly does
from connecting link and constitutes common centre,
from which flows and raiates rights and liabilities of all tho
parties compliments for whose benefit it made,
have right insist its foreclosure and the LEGATION
of the fund arising therrom to the satisfaction OF the debts
which intended to the purchasers from Rogers
u right insist upon the appropriation of the property
conveyed the satisfaction of the debts which
from Rogers nasmuc as the conveyance was made Tor tnat
purpose and thus whole part the ncumbrance
ssE o ny on f nS ar
ton of the rights of parties in this suit is difficult to
how they be adjusted without the presence OF all the par
ties The purchasers from Rogers nave right 70 demand
appropriation of the fund arising from sale of the
property purchasers neither have the
right to the appropriation OF more than bro rata OF such
fund-henCe the purchasers of both tracts interested in
fund.- and the bringing them before the court
suit which appropriation and disposition of that fund
sought, make the bill multifarous And in the
view have taken of this think there be
question as to jurisdiction the Upon this point
the defendants has cited authority sup
port the proposition relied upon IN argument and any
| such exist, not aware OF it.
The decree Of the chancellor will be reversed and the cause
| remanled. HAWKINS, Judge.
Attest: J. G. FRAZER, Clerk.