Holtzinger v. Edwards

1 N.W. 600, 51 Iowa 383
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedJune 11, 1879
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 1 N.W. 600 (Holtzinger v. Edwards) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Holtzinger v. Edwards, 1 N.W. 600, 51 Iowa 383 (iowa 1879).

Opinion

Seevers, J.

1. nrmciAL sale: satisfactionor juag. menis prior liens. — The rule is that purchasers at execution sales must take care and see to it the debtor has a title or interest in the property sold. Dean v. Morris, 4 G. Greene, 312: Downard v. Crenshaw, 49 Iowa, 296. If there has been no negligence in this respect, and the debtor had neither title nor interest, relief has been granted in equity. Ritter v. Henshaw, 7 Iowa, 97, and cases cited. It is provided by statute that the sale may be set aside “where the judgment on which the execution issued was not a lien” on the pnrperty sold. Code, § 3090.

The facts in the case at bar are that the defendant was the owner of the legal title at the time the judgment was rendered and sale made. The judgments were liens thereon. It is clear, therefore, the case is not brought within the statute.

The appellants, however, insist the rule is that the sale will be set aside when the purchaser does not obtain anything of value, and, in support of this proposition, cite Chambers v. Cochran et al., 18 Iowa, 159; Preston v. Harrison, 9 Ind., 1; and Cowles, Ex’r, v. Bacon, 21 Conn., 451.

These cases only go to the extent of holding that the sale will be set aside if the-debtor had no title or interest. The question of the debtor having the legal title or'an apparent interest, or whether such interest was probably valuable or otherwise, was not considered. By their purchase the plaintiffs obtained all the right, title and interest of the defendant, including his right of redemption. Defendant had a fee simple title. It is true it had been sold under executions based on judgments which had priority to the plaintiffs’. The property was also incumbered by other liens which were [385]*385prior to the plaintiffs’; as to some of them they had actual knowledge, and constructive notice of all. Because of their failure to pay off the prior liens the plaintiffs have obtained nothing by their purchase. But they acted on their own judgment, and if they have not realized anything it is their own fault, or mistake, as to the value of the property, or extent of the prior liens, or of their ability to pay off and discharge such liens. Having taken the chances, they must, under the circumstances, abide the reshit.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Glancy v. Ragsdale
102 N.W.2d 890 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1960)
Swanson v. Baldwin
85 N.W.2d 576 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1957)
Equitable Life Insurance v. Condon
10 N.W.2d 78 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1943)
Van Rheenen v. Windell
262 N.W. 120 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1935)
Ridgway v. Mirkovich
259 N.W. 303 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1935)
Home Savings Bank v. Klise
216 N.W. 109 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1927)
Stonerook v. Wisner
171 Iowa 109 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1915)
Curtis v. Barber
108 N.W. 755 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1906)
Crawford v. Foreman
103 N.W. 1000 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1905)
Poppleton v. Bryan
58 P. 767 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1899)
Weaver v. Stacy
62 N.W. 22 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 N.W. 600, 51 Iowa 383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holtzinger-v-edwards-iowa-1879.