|
|
|
|
|
|
|
330 COOMBS v. JORDAN.
right, as a purchaser, be in any manner affected by any irregularity
in the case, or misapplication of the purchase money. When he
pays the whole of the stipulated amount he is entitled to an abso-
lute conveyance of the whole right of the parties to the suit,
whatever that may be, and is not bound to look to any thing beyond
the express terms of his contract with the court, as reported by the
trustee employed to make the sale. (g)
Where a mortgagee has made further advances to the mortgagor,
and taken his bond, binding himself and his heirs, to secure pay-
ment, the mortgagee may tack such bond debt to his mortgage as
against the heir or devisee of the mortgagor, who shall not be
allowed to redeem without paying the bond as well as the mortgage
debt. This, however, is solely a matter of arrangement to prevent
circuity of suits; for in natural justice, the claim has no foundation.
But this tacking of the bond debt to the mortgage is never allowed,
in any case, to the prejudice of creditors whose claims, as to the
bond debt, are of equal degree, (r) Here the heirs of Jordan are
not mortgagees; but merely have an interest in the equitable lien
held by the court for their benefit only so far as there might be a
surplus after the payment of all the creditors of Richard Jordan,
deceased. These heirs of Jordan may, it is true, in respect to the
guardian's bond by which Booth was bound as a surety, be con-
sidered as bond creditors of Booth. But a mere bond can give
them no lien whatever upon the estate of Booth, and they certainly
cannot be allowed to come here and have their bond debt tacked to
the equitable lien of the court, to the prejudice of the judgment and
other creditors of Booth.
There is therefore, no foundation for these alleged superior
claims and pretensions of the heirs of Richard Jordan, deceased.
They can only stand here as bond creditors against the estate of
Jeremiah Booth, deceased, and take subject to all prior liens, and
fro rota with the other creditors of Booth in equal degree.
Whereupon it is Ordered, that this case be and the same is
hereby referred to the auditor with directions to state such account
as the nature of the case may require; in which he will consider
the claim of Stone & McWilliams as founded on a judgment
against the late Jeremiah Booth, James Walker being insolvent,
taking date from its rendition in the county court. And the claim
(f) Bennett v, Hamill 2 Scho, & Lefr, 577, 581; Burke v. Crosbie. Ball & Bea.
501; Lloyd r. Johnes, 9 Ves. 65; Curtis v. Price, 12 Ves. 105.—(r) Powel Mortg.
348, 526, 1019.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
