Perkins v. Fairfield
This text of 11 Mass. 227 (Perkins v. Fairfield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The order of the Court of Common Pleas, under which the administrators made the sale in this case, was a license to them to make sale of all the real estate of their intestate. That court had jurisdiction of the subject matter. If that jurisdiction was improvidently exercised, or in a manner not warranted by the evidence from the Probate Court, yet it is not to be corrected at the expense of the purchaser, who had a right to rely upon the order of the court, as an authority emanating from a competent jurisdiction. It is too late to say that the neglect of requiring a bond from the administrators, to account for the proceeds of the sale, is fatal to a title derived from their authority,
Tenant defaulted.
Leverett vs. Harris, 7 Mass. Rep. 292. — Sed vide Thomson vs. Brown & Al. 16 Mass. Rep. 172.—Heath vs. Wells, 5 Pick. 140.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 Mass. 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perkins-v-fairfield-mass-1814.