Court Opinion

ID: 9808331
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 20:34:42.558879+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:11:16.154102
License: Public Domain

Daniel,
disentiente.’ — I do not agree in the opinion expressed by a majority of the members of the court in this case, that an executor or administrator cannot purchase at a sale made by a sheriff, who has levied an execution on the goods and chattels of the testator or intestate. I know of no authority prohibiting them from purchasing at a sheriff’s sale. 1 do not think the rase comes within tiie reason of the rule which prohibits executors, administrators and trusters purchasing at their own sales. By the levy, the title to property is immediately vested in the .sheriff, his sales are obliged to be public, after an advertisement. I do not see what chance there can be for the executor or adminis*412trator, to commit frauds in case they are allowed to purchase. This court lias decided that they may purchase at a sheriff’s sale. Blount v. Davis. (2 Dev. 19.) In the present case, Lavender, who procured the money was not the executor. He had acted only as the agent of the executrix. I should suppose that the purchase of the slaves by Ross, for the benefit of Lavender, was lawful, and that the title of the slaves vested in him.
Fan Curiam. — Direct a reference.