Ewald v. Coleman
This text of 19 Ind. 66 (Ewald v. Coleman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
We think the order appealed from, in this case, was an injustice, as in the case of Flagg v. Sloan, and not a mere restraining order, as in The Cincinnati, etc., Co. v. Huncheon, 16 Ind., pp. 432, 436. Hence, an appeal would lie in the case. It enjoined the execution of a deed to land till the validity of a sheriffs sale could be tested in the pending suit. We think, also, the complaint, on its face, makes a case for relief. It shows that when the sheriff offered the [67]*67property for sale tie announced that he should only sell a conditional estate, that might be redeemed in a year; that this was all he did sell; and for that intent he gave a certificate instead of a deed, for the fee simple; that, in consequence of this course, which, we must take it, the execution-plaintiffs sanctioned, property worth six thousand dollars sold for about three hundred dollars, and which, otherwise, would have sold for three thousand dollars.
The temporary injunction is affirmed, with costs, and the cause will proceed below, to answer, issue, and trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
19 Ind. 66, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ewald-v-coleman-ind-1862.