|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
544 RIDGELY v. IGLEHART.
only exist in a vendor as against a vendee, and those claiming un-
der the vendee with notice. It may be waived or extinguished by
a separate express agreement, or by an analogous express provision
in the contract of sale itself; or by an implication arising from the
acts of the vendor. And it can only be sustained and enforced in
a court of equity, (f) Here, however, that sale upon which this
plaintiff claims the benefit of an equitable lien was not made by
himself; but under a judicial authority, and according to the very
peculiar provisions of an act of Assembly regulating the whole
subject; so that, as on a sale made under a decree of this court,
the equitable lien, if any such lien arose, could only be held and
enforced by the court under whose authority the sale was made,
and not by this plaintiff, (g) But this plaintiff can have no lien of
any description; nor obtain relief in any other mode than that
given and prescribed by the act of Assembly under which the sale
was made.
By several statutes lands have been made liable to be taken in
execution and sold for the satisfaction of debts; and as a conse-
quence of such liability, it has become a well established principle,
that it gives to the creditor a lien which fastens from the date of
the judgment upon all the lands which the debtor then has, or may
thereafter acquire, so as to be liable to be taken in execution on
such judgment. The principles upon which this judicial lien rest
have, however, no analogy to that kind of lien on which this plain-
tiff relies.
By an act of Assembly it is declared, that all lands and tene-
ments belonging to any public debtor, after the commencement of
suit against him, shall be liable to execution in whosesoever hands
or possession they may be found. (A) This law gives the state a
lien of a peculiar character which, it is evident, may, and, perhaps,
can only, under any circumstances, be enforced at common law. (i)
In England the king is allowed a similar lien upon the real estate
of public debtors, (j) But this lien has been given for the benefit
of the state alone; and therefore cannot be permitted, in any case,
to be called into action to subserve the purposes of an individual
who institutes a suit against any one who stands bound, as in this
instance, only nominally as a public debtor, but in reality as liable
(f) Mackreth v. Symmons, 15 Ves. 330; Iglehart v. Armiger, 1 Bland, 519. —
(g) Iglehart v. Armiger, 1 Bland, 527; Andrews v.. Scotton, 2 Bland, 656. —(h)
March, 1778, ch. 9, s. 6. —(t) Davidson v. Clayland, 1 H. & J, 546. —(j) The United
States v. Fisher, 2 Cran. 358; Jones v. Jones, 1 Bland, 443.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
