|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
POST v. MACKALL. 495
is no party to this case, there may be some doubt, whether the
trustees under the decree of the 4th of May, 1830, can convey
good titles to the purchasers from them. Whereupon, the plain-
tiffs prayed, that the Bank might be required to procure its trustee
Smith, to convey the real estate so held in trust by him, to the
trustees appointed by the decree in this case, in order, that they
might convey good legal titles to the purchasers, &c.
3d March, 1831. —BLAND, Chancellor. —It is a well settled
principle, in relation to creditors' bills, that where a creditor comes
in after the institution of the suit, by filing the voucher of his claim
or otherwise, he and all who have an interest in the claim, either
as trustee, or cestui que trust, do thereby, to the full extent of their
respective interests, as expressed by such voucher, become parties
to the suit, and are bound accordingly by the decree in favour of
the purchasers under it; and also as regards all others who were
originally or may afterwards be considered as parties to the suit, (g)
It is true, that in cases of this kind, where mortgagees, or other
like incumbrancers, are not made parties, or do not come in, they
are untouched by the decree; but if they once come in and con-
sent to the sale, or claim under the decree they are bound by it. (h)
But, in general, for the protection of purchasers, the surplus of the
proceeds of the sale will not be paid to the mortgagor, his inheri-
tor, or a defendant, where it is shewn, that there are outstanding
incumbrancers who have not come in, or been made parties to the
suit; and the sale has not been made subject to such incum-
brances, (i) Hence it would be wholly unnecessary and improper
to order a conveyance, as prayed by this petition.
Whereupon it is Ordered, that the said petition be and the same
is hereby dismissed with costs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The defendant Christiana Mackall, not having answered the bill
filed on the 10th of February, an interlocutory decree was passed
against her according to the act of Assembly; (j) and a commis-
sion was issued and returned, but without any testimony. Where-
upon it was Decreed, on the 24th of March, 1831, that the trustees
appointed by the decree of the 4th of May, 1830, make sale of the
real estate, clear of all claim of this defendant Christiana Mackall
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(g) Mitf, Plea. 249; Hammond v. Hammond, 2 Bland, 349, 388. —(h) Kenebel v.
Scrafton, 13 Ves. 370; Hammond v. Hammond, 2 Bland, 388, —(i) St. Antonio v.
Adderly 12 Cond. Cha, Rep, 372. —(j) 1820, ch. 161, s. 1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
