Case Name: The People, on the relation of S. Sutliff, vs. C. Easton, sheriff of Montgomery
Court: New York Supreme Court of Judicature
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1829-05
Citations: 2 Wend. 297
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People, on the relation of S. Sutliff, vs. C. Easton, sheriff of Montgomery.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wendell's Reports
Volume: 2
Pages: 297–298

Head Matter:
The People, on the relation of S. Sutliff, vs. C. Easton, sheriff of Montgomery.
A person obmentS against land of Mk ing himself the purchaser at an amount exceeding the judgment, has no right to redeem the premises purchased by him from the operation of a sale anterior to that under which he purchased; the sale of the land under his execution having extinguished the lien of his judgment; he is no longer a judgment creditor having a lien.
Motion for a mandamus. Certain real estate of T. E. Sutliff was sold on the 15th August, 1827, under an executian issued under the seal of the common pleas of Montgomery, on a justice’s judgment, for $37,81, and puschased by J. W. Cady and another, who obtained a certificate of sale, which, by assignment, came to the relator in this case. In December, 1827, S. Wiley recovered a judgment against T. g Sutliff for $803 58, issued an execution, and on the 20th February, 1828, sold the same premises, became himself the purchaser at the sum of $318 50, (a sum exceeding the amount of his judgment and the sheriff’s fees,) and-obtained the sheriff’s certificate. On the 14th November, 1828, Wiley paid to the sheriff $65, claiming the right to redeem the premises from the operation of the sale of August, 1827.
JD. Cady, for relator.

Opinion:
By the Court, Savage, C. J.
The relator is entitled to his deed. Wiley's judgment, by the sale under his execution at a sum beyond the amount thereof, became satisfied, pun he was no longer a judgment creditor, having a Men upon the land sold at the previous sale, under which the relator claims. Had the premises been purchased by a stranger instead of the plaintiff in the execution, such would have been the effect, and whether he or another became the purchaser, cannot alter the rights of the relator. A sale of land under an execution, extinguishes the lien of the judgment on the land sold. (8 John's R. 334. See also 4 Cowen, 417, and 7 Cowen, 21.) Let a mandamus issue.