Court Opinion

ID: 6700814
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-20 22:08:40.356842+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:01:24.790177
License: Public Domain

Rodman, J.,
concurring in part: High bidders at a judicial sale whose bid had been accepted by decree of confirmation are deprived of *317vested rights by an order entered without notice to them and without an opportunity to be heard. They appeal from the order setting aside the decree of confirmation. That appeal presents the single question: Were appellants entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard? Justice Higgins, speaking for the majority, answers in the affirmative. With this conclusion I am in complete agreement for the reasons so clearly stated by him.
Questions relating to the distribution of the proceeds of sale are not germane to the question presented by appellants. I think it unwise to express opinions on questions not raised by the appeal. It may be noted the parties who challenged the decree of confirmation have ■consented to the order of 3 November which orders a division of the proceeds of sale between the husband and wife. If in fact such division is for the best interest of the incompetent, no reason now occurs to me why the court should be deprived of the power to make such order.