CHAPTER XVIII. OF THE RIGHTS OF PURCHASERS, WITH AND WITHOUT NOTICE.. Purchasers, how they submit to the Furisdiction of the Court. -Who are Purchasers in good faith, or bona fide Purchasers, and Purchasers with or without Notice, or innocent Purchasers. - Of Notice, what is: what is not.Actual Notice. - Constructive Notice. -Lis Pendens as Notice. What is equivalent to Notice.--Occupation or Possession as Notice. - Recording and Registration of Instruments as Notice. When not Notice. - Judgments as Notice, and prior Claims. - Purchaser with Notice, how affected.— Effect where a Purchaser has no Notice.— Effect of failure to record a Deed, as to subsequent Purchaser at Execution Sales. Of the Right of Purchasers to Relief. -Rights of Purchasers. - Of Irregularities in the Proceedings, and how they affect Purchasers. Of the Effect of the Return upon a Purchaser's Title, and a Failure to Return the Writ. - Rule in regard to Returns in the New England States on Extent. Of the Presumptions in favor of the Regularity of the Proceedings of an Officer; Omnia præsumuntur rite et solenniter esse acta.-Where a Purchaser becomes a Trustee. What passes at a Sale of Land on Execution. What constitutes a Purchaser's Title. Rights of Debtor after Sale. 327. IN treating of the rights of purchasers under executions, the same distinction will be made as to their rights as the law makes. That is, as between bona fide purchasers, or purchasers in good faith, and purchasers not so regarded; and of purchasers with and without notice, and the distinctions between strangers and third parties who purchase, and creditors, or other parties to the action, who bid in and become purchasers, in order to secure their claims; of the title of purchasers, and what constitutes their title; of the presumptions the law makes in order to protect their title, and what irregularities are, and are not. sufficient to avoid or nullify their title to property purchased. Where a person purchases under a decree or judgment of a court, he submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court in that action, as to all matters connected with the sale, or relating to him in the character of purchaser.' By becoming a quasi party to the proceeding, he becomes liable for the purchase-money, or the amount of his bid; and where he neglects to make a payment according to his contract, he may be compelled, by an attachment, to complete his purchase, and should, as a matter of right, upon refusal, be compelled to pay interest upon the bid. A purchaser at a sale of this kind is not bound by any terms or conditions imposed by the officer conducting the sale unless they are imposed by the law. But succeeding to the right, title, and interest of the debtor in the land, under a process issued at the instance of the creditor to subject the property to the satisfaction of his judgment, he has the same right to obtain relief against a fraudulent disposition of the property that the creditor had. In regard to the laws relating to fraudulent conveyances, such purchaser must be one who 1 Atkinson v. Richardson, 14 Wis. 157. Requa v. Rea, 2 Paige, 339. Clarkson v. Read, 15 Gratt. 288. Gross v. Pearcey, 2 P. & H. 483. Blackmore V. Barker, 2 Swan, 340. Stinson v. Meade, 2 R. I. 511. Spaun v. Jones, 4 C. E. Green, 251. 2 Atkinson v. Richardson, 15 Wis. 594. Wood v. Mann, 3 Sumn. 318. Gordon v. Sims, 2 McCord Ch. 151. Cowell v. Lippit, 3 R. I. 92. has acquired the legal title Howell v. Schenck, 4 Zabr. 89. Stevenson v. Black, Saxt. 388. Loomis's Appeal, 22 Penn. 312. by a valid deed of conveyance,' and succeeds to all the rights which the debtor had, to sue the original grantor for specific performance or reformation of the deed; but is not privy to the defendant; but he has the right to an order from the court directing the officer to make him a deed ; and, in cases where granted by statute, to a writ in the nature of a habere facias possessionem, to obtain possession, but acquires no right of entry until he has a deed; and unless granted possession by the decree, or by statute, has no right to enter on the premises unless they are vacant.' The rights and liablilities of the parties depend entirely upon statute law. As against the officer, a stranger to the action, who is the purchaser, acquires no right in the property sold unless he pays down in cash the whole of the purchase-money. When the money is paid his right is complete, and a deed is merely evidence of that right." 328. WHO ARE PURCHASEKS IN GOOD FAITH, OK BONA FIDE PURCHASERS AND INNOCENT PURCHASERS, AND WHO ARE NOT. A purchaser who has advanced the consideration for the purchase is deemed a bona fide purchaser," unless he is shown to have notice of irregularities or other matters which will avoid his purchase; and in order to constitute a person such a purchaser without notice, so as to entitle him to protection against a prior legal or equitable right, of which he had no notice, he must have parted with something that was valuable, upon the faith of his purchase, and before he had notice of such prior right or equity." 11 Ayres v. Duprez, 27 Tex. 593. Miller v. Finley, 26 Mich. 249. An execution-creditor who bids off the property at a sale 1 Hopkins v. Webb, 9 Humph. 519. Morgan v. Bouse, 53 Mo. 219. Miller v Jameson, 24 N. J. Eq. 41. 3 Brily v. Cherry, 2 Dev. 2. 4 Phillips v. Dawley, 1 Neb. 320. Dorsey v. Campbell, 1 Bland, 357. McMehcen v. Marman, 8 G. & J. 57. 6 Young v. Withers, 8 Dana, 165. People v. Nelson, 13 Johns. 340. * Russell v. Dyer, 33 N. H. 186. 9 People v. Hays, 5 Cal. 66. 10 Miller v. Alexander, 8 Tex. 36. 12 Hutchings v.Chapman, 37 Tex. 612. How v. Weldon, 2Ves. 516. In re Howe, I Paige, 125. Lawless v. Kinney, 1 H. & B. 400. Churchill v. Grove, I Chan. Cas. 35. Story v. Lord Windsor, 2 Atk. 630. Molony v. Kernan, 2 Dr. & War. 31. Borell v. Dann, 2 Ha. 440. Jackson v. Rowe, 2 S. & S. 472. Jackson v. Campbell, 19 Johns. 282. Coddington v. Bay, 20 Id. 637. Williams v. Hollings on his own execution, and applies the bid on his judgment, is not regarded as a bona fide or innocent purchaser; he takes for a pre-existing debt, and the consideration is not advanced on the faith of the purchase;' a plaintiff purchasing under a voidable execution; or purchasing under his own writ goods fraudulently purchased by his debtor. Under the class of purchasers who are not innocent, that is, purchasers without notice, are the credit or or plaintiff in the action. The law presumes that he has notice of every fact and step in the proceeding, from the commencement of the action until after the completion of the proceedings under execution, and the creditor is bound to kno w that all the proceedings are legal up to the sale. This rule applies to the attorneys in the case.* A person purchasing, knowing that the judgment on which the execution issued has been satisfied, or that the claim was false on which judgment by default was taken,* worth, I Strobh. Eq. 103. Rayne v. 1 Swazey v. Burke, 12 Pet. 1. Ayres v. Duprez, 27 Tex. 593. Pettingill v. Moss, 2 Minn. 222. Wright v. Douglass, 10 Barb. 97. Orme v. Roberts, 33 Tex. 768. Baze v. Arper, 6 Minn. 226. Stephens v. Dennison, 1 Oreg. 19. Harrison v. Rapp, 2 Blackf. 1. Hefferlein v. Sinsindorfer, 2 Kans. 401. Collier v. Stanbrough,6 How. 14. Curtis v. Swearingen, 1 Ill. 141. Doe v. Collins, 1 Ind. 24. Winston v. Otley, 25 Miss. 451. Trotter v. Nelson, 1 Swan, 7. Nichols v. Michael, 23 Id. 264. Hennequin v. Naylor, 24 Id. 139. Earl, &c. v. Winsmore, I B. & C. 514. 222. 4 Woodruff v. Heard, 9 Ind. 186. Swazey v. Burke, 12 Pet. 11. Harrison v. Doe, 2 Black f. 1. Ayres v. Duprez, 27 Tex. 502. Simonds v. Catlin, 2 Caines, 61. Pettingill v. Moss, I Minn. Hayden v. Dunlap, 3 Bibb, 261. Wright v. Douglass, 10 Barb. 97. Stephens v. Dennison, 1 Or. 19. Orme v. Roberts, 33 Tex. 768. McLean Co. · Bank v. Flagg, 31 Ill. 290. Baze v. Arper, 6 Minn. 220. Keeling v. Heard, 3 Head. 592. Hefferlein v. Sinsindorfer, 2 Kans. 401. Piel v. Brayer, 30 Ind. 232. Collier v. Stanbrough, 6 How. 14. v. Franklin, 27 Iowa, 239. Swearingen, 1 Ill. 141. State Bank, 18 Wis. 561. lins, 1 Ind. 24. Hughes v. Streeter, 24 Ill. 647. Stroud v. Casey, 25 Tex. 740. Twogood Curtis v. Corinth v. Doe v. Col 5 Morton v. Granada Academies, 16 Miss. 773. Reed v. Austin, 9 Mo. or who is notified that the judgment is paid, and refuses the officer's re-tender of the purchase-money;' a trustee purchasing for the benefit of creditors; a plaintiff who bids on the property in the name of another, but applies the amount due on his judgment in payment of his bid, and is himself the real purchaser, the person in whose name the property is purchased is not an innocent purchaser.' A person falsely representing to the parties that the sale has been postponed, then combines with the officer to forestall competition by selling as secretly as possible, and who buys in the property at one-twentieth its value.* The proof must be of a definite and unquestionable character to establish a resulting trust. Where the attorney in the case purchases at an inadequate price, the sale will, upon slight additional facts, be deemed fraudulent, or in trust for the debtor; or, if for several creditors, in trust for them. Where he purchases in his own right, and takes the title in his own name, he is then a bona fide purchaser." Within the recording or registration acts, a creditor who purchases at an execution sale, is a valuable consideration, although the price is applied in payment of the debt." chaser is one who purchases for an honest, legitimate purpose, as contradistinguished from one who purchases for some fraudulent or improper purpose, and hence every person buying at an execution sale, for the purpose of satisfying an honest debt, is a bona fide purchaser. One who buys and pays nothing is not in any legal sense a purchaser. But satisfying an execution to the extent of the bid, is such a payment as constitutes a creditor a bona fide purchaser, purchaser for a entire purchaseA bona fide pur Howell v. McCrary, 7 Dana, 388. Howell v. McCrary, 7 Dana, • Day V. Graham, 6 Ill. 435. Chappeli v. Dunn, 21 Barb. 17. 10 Wood v. Chapin, 13 N. Y. 509. |