The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1883-04-17

thews, Respondent-Duval county. .
WRsrcorT, j.:
/. A. the purchaser of tract of land pays one
half of the purchase money and gives amort-
gage to secure the balance to B., the vendor. B:
the original vendor and mortgage Of A. sells
and assigns the mortgage Internationally toe.
G. takes il independent of any verbal conditions
attending the original sale by A. to B., so far as
they were for the benefit Of B.
g. A sale of security for less than It's face
value will not be set aside because made reluc-
family and when one is greatly in want of money,
the sale not being unusual or oppressive, there
being no fraudulent advantage imposition or il.
legal restraint or duress.
Decree affirmed.
c. p & J. c. Cooper, for Appellant R. B.
Archibald for Appellee.
J. C. Greeley, Appellant, vs.. l.. w. spratt, AID.
pellee-Duval county.
RANDALL, c. j..
J. In proceedings under the act relatipg to
-fpfehfv ekfify aud f4iner upon Il e0mpiaffit for
a forcible entry and Withholding the peaceable
possession of complainant and the entry by force
by the defendant and putting and keeping COM
planant out and damages therefor, are the
questions in issue,
g The law forbds forcs6h entry whether
defendant has title or right of possession or not
in this proceeding there can be no inquiry into
the title. II the party entering has right TO
the possession and another is in peaceable pos
session the party having the right must resort to
the law 10 obtain it, unless he can do so without
force and in peaceable, open manner.
3. Testimony showing that plaintiff had been
in possession Of room for several weeks occu.
pyng it as an Office with his library and furni-
ture and that bis property was, without his con-
sent, in the night time, removed from the room
by the defendants directions and plaintiff was
by force prevented by defendants servant from
rp-pn 0nathor yva rNrfl 10
iendant in possession as a tenant. is sufficient TO
sustain n complaint for forcible entry and unlaw-
ful detalner; and the complaint having been
filed within few days after such election and
occnpany by the tenant, such facts afford pre-
sump'ive evidence upon which the jury are au-
thorized to find that the defendant continued to
bold possession against plaintiff at the time of
filing the complaint, there being nothing Ia
show that defendant or his tenant ceased to oc-
cUpy the premises so taken possession of
4. WhenNhe plaintiff had pcaceably occupied
premises tor several weeks and is dspoSsessed
nv force without process Of law by defendant. il
ls not material, IN proceeding for forcble entry
and delalner, w hether the plaintiff was originally
tresspasser or that defendant may have legal
right to the possession. The gist of the proceed
ing under The statute is the forcible entry and
ous'ng plaintiff from peaceable possession
contrary TO law.
D. In estimating damages for the wrongful
djspossession and Withholding of premises under
the iorcibe entry and unlawful detainer act, the
jury may take into consideration the rental value
of the premises.
6. Where there are conflicting statements of
witnesses the jury must determine the facts from
fair consideration of the whole testimony
Judgment affirmed
Geo Wheaton Deans, for Appellant; Cockrel
and Walker. for Appellee
John J. Knox. Commissioner of the Freedman's
Sar md Trvc4
Wheaton Deans, Administrator de bonfs non Of
The estate of jacob Foreman, deceased Ap-
peilants. VS.. Leonidas W. Spratt and William
B. Barnett, Respondents-Duva county
WEsrcoTT. J.:
l. Where under contract for the sale of land
the purchaser enters into the possession upon
the payment Of five hundred dollars ($500) cash,
his possession is lawful until the contract is off
Up to that time he is not liable for use and occu.
patton To his vendor. Where however, such
purchaser declines TO take such title as the ven.
dor has and the time for pcrfectng title as agreed
upon in the contract has expired, and The con-
tract cannot be performed for want of good title
and the purchaser declines 10 take such title as
the vendor has, The purchaser must yield possess
sion. Ii he does not ejectment by the vendor
will lie, and that without return of The cash
payment or a notice to quit.
2. Where the case made by the bill of the
purchaser against the vendor for specific perform
ance shows that the vendor cannot make good
title, and the purchaser does not ask TO have de-
cree for such title as the vendor may have. but
only for good title, specific performance not be-
ing in The power Il the vendor, the court will
not decree it,
3. Where the primary equity and relief sought
by the purchaser Is the performance Of the con-
tract of sale by which the purchaser is entitled
to good title from the vendor, the granting OF
an injunction restraining an action of ejectment
by vendor against the purchaser or his tenant in
possession is dependent upon the right to specific
performance of the contract If this, the primary
equity claimed, does not exist, an Injunction
should not be granted in aid OF it, and it granted
should be dissolved upon motion.
4. If the vendor is in situation to obtain a
title, is in such situation that it is only neces-
sary, for instance, to demand deed after having
paid the purchase money at an administrators
sale OF the subject OF the contract of sale between
him and the purchaser or to do like acts clearly
within his power, and thus acquire title, a
court of equity will retain the bill, will reqnire
him TO perform such acts and will therenpon de-
cree performance of the contract
8. A conveyance to grAntor subsequent to
bis deed 10 another, conveying with warranty,
enures TO the benefit of his grantee. The grant
or's deed OF warranty operates as covenant
real running with the land.
6. A highest bidder at a sale of land by COM
missioner appointed by the County Court upon
the petition OF an administrator TO sell the lands
OF an estate TO pay debts, the bid of such bidder
having been simply reported to the court, ac.
qulres no interest in the land, and there is no
contract of sale which can be enforced until con-
himaiion Of the sale by the court. BY his bid
he simply becomes party to and can be heard
in the subsequent proceedings
Z. Where such bidder is q person named as
creditor in The schedule of debts, and there has
been an autecedent assignment Of the debt. the
assignee is not responsible for the bid. The as
signees interest Is restricted TO the application of
the purchase money TO his debt He acquires
no interest or tile in the land sold, nor has the
agent Of said assignee, independent of any other
authority from the assignOr, a right to act as
agent Of the assignor in making bid.
8. The administrator of an estate is under no
Obligation legal or equitable, 10 person who Is
neither debtor to nor creditor. nor heir nor ven
dee Of the intestate. and who ls q stranger en-
deavoring to acquire title 70 land claimed by the
administrator 10 belong to the estate such claim
OF The stranger TO the land being by virtue of a
contract OF sale with third party, having no
title against the estate.
Q. The institution of q suit as 10 persons not
parties claiming independent rights, Is effective
only as q tis pendens. Whatever may be the ul-
innate decree therein rendered. II is not binding
upon independent and other rights asserted be-
tween persons not parties TO the litigation Queys,
Whether court of equity will, In a suit by the
heir against the administrator, TO which the
creditor OF the estate is no party, arrest proceed
ings in the County Court looking to q sale Of
lands Of the estate to pay the alleged debt OF the
creditor (which proceeding has progressed to q
sale and report by commissioner Of . bid), and
transform the proceedings into one for the sale of
land for disiribution upon the ground that there
is no debt due the cfedit0r,
A.. - S.uka. - fk<.~m