Case Name: Hall v. O'Hanlan
Court: Constitutional Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1806-04
Citations: 2 Brev. 46
Docket Number: 
Parties: Hall v. O’Hanlan.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 46–46

Head Matter:
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, COLUMBIA,
APRIL, 1806.
Hall v. O’Hanlan.
Purchasers at public sales, not complying with, the terms thereof, are liable on a resale for the difference between the price or sum of the first and second sale, &c.
Note, Quere, whether the action should not have been brought by the'sheriff ?
Motion for a new trial. Assumpsit, before Gkimke, J., in Rich, land district. Defendant had bid for at tract of land at sheriff’s sale, under execution at the suit of plaintiff, which was knocked off to him. Having failed to comply with the terms of sale, the sheriff set up the land again, and it was resold at a price below what it had sold for at first. This action was to recover the difference. At the trial, parol evidence was offered to prove the circumstances of the sale and resale, which evidence was objected to, but the objec. tion was overruled. The sheriff, however, proved that the minutes of the sale were entered by him in a book, but the book had been accidentally destroyed by fire. Verdict for plaintiff.
Egan, for the defendant,
contended, that the objection ought to have been sustained. The case of Simon v. Motivos, 3 Bur. 1921, 1 Bl. Rep. 599, applies only to goods bought at auction. Where lands are the subject of sale, the auctioneer is not to be considered as the agent of both parties, and therefore his entering the name of the buyer of a lot of land in his book as the purchaser, is not a note in writing within the statute of frauds. Stansfield v. Johnson, 1 Esp. Rep. 101. Cited also Pow. on Contr. 266, 270. 1 Ves. 221.
Clifton, for the plaintiff,
relied on the A. A. 1785, P. L. 365, which declares, that “ every person who shall purchase any lands, &c. at any public sale, which purchase shall be entered in the books of the vendue master so selling, such persons refusing to comply, &c. shall be liable to all losses,” &c. And authorizes the vendue master to resell; and whatever deficiency shall arise, the vendue master shall recover, &c. The Court of Common Pleas to make rules relative to the recovery of such deficiencies.

Opinion:
By the court.
This case is within the act of assembly.
Motion rejected.