In Equity, from Fayette Superior Court. Tried before Judge Bull, March Term, 1856.

This was a bill filed by Dunn, as administrator of John Sellars, deceased, against Mary Fernander, formerly Mary Palmer, and administratrix and solo heir of John Palmer, her ■ former husband. The bill alleged, that in 1886, John Palmer made and delivered to Sellars, for a valuable consideration, to-wit: §250 00, a deed of warranty to lot of land 224, in then Lee, now Sumter County; that the number of the lot was left blank in said deed, but that said lot was the one meant and intended to be sold; that Sellars sold said land to one McLendon, and gave his bond for titles, which, bond passed by assignment to one McCrea ; that said Palmer never- took out the grant to said lot, whereby it reverted to the State.

In 1846, McCrea sued Sellars on said bond for titles. Pending the action Sellars died, and complainant, his administrator, was made a party to the suit.

In September, 1851, a judgment was rendered against him for $1.108, with costs, which he has paid; that Mrs. Eernander was notified of the pendency of this suit. The bill prayed that she be decreed to make good to complainant the amount of said verdict, with costs, charges and expenses of litigation.

The answei of Sirs. Eernander denied that Sellars paid, anything for the land, but said the bargain was made in her presence, and that Sellars gave his note for Two Hundred and Fifty Dollars, agreeing, at the same time, to take out the grant for the land; that he afterwards, when Palmer was intoxicated, contrived to get the note out of his possession, and never returned it, though she had heard him admit having it and promise to return it; that Palmer had employed Sellars to go and sell the land for him, who returned and said the best offer he could got was two hundred dollars, and offered two hundred and fifty himself, which was agreed to, and the • trade consummated as before stated; and the answer charged that Sellars had then contracted to sell the land for five hundred dollars, which he afterwards did. The answer denied any notice of the law-suit on the bond. The answer admit*ted that lot 224, was the lot intended to bo conveyed in the deed.

On the trial, the complainant produced a copy of a written ■notice of tbe suit of McCrea, and a demand to come forward and defend, which he made affidavit to.having served on the -defendant.

Jambs Bloodwoeth, a witness to the deed from Palmer .to Sellars, testified that he understood from the parties, at ¡the time that Sellars bought the land, because Palmer was in debt to him; heard nothing about the grant.

…

Citation profile

How this case has been treated — in progress