Duncan v. Sanders
| Decision Date | 30 June 1869 |
| Citation | 1869 WL 5254,50 Ill. 475 |
| Parties | WILLIAM J. DUNCAN et al.v.ALIVA U. SANDERS et al. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of White county; the Hon. JAMES M. POLLOCK, Judge, presiding.
The facts in this case are presented in the opinion.
Messrs. TANNER & CASEY, for the appellants.
Mr. C. E. MCDOWELL and Mr. J. K. ALBRIGHT, for the appellees.
This was a proceeding to obtain partition and the assignment of dower in certain lands held in common by the parties. The commissioners having reported that the lands were not susceptible of partition, a sale was ordered. The sale having been made, on the coming in of the master's report, exceptions were taken, and a motion was made to set aside the sale. On hearing the evidence in the court below, the motion was allowed and the sale set aside, and another sale ordered.
To reverse that order, the case is brought to this court on appeal, and errors assigned on the record.
It appears that the master first offered the several tracts together, for which he received a bid of $1,200, and no one offering more, the bystanders demanded that the property should be offered in separate tracts, and when so offered, the several pieces were struck off to the highest bidders and sold in the aggregate for $1,900. After all of the tracts had been struck off, Duncan, who had bid $1,200, offered to give $1,950 for all of the lands.
It is urged that the land was sold at such a sacrifice as to require the sale to be set aside and the property again offered, and that the master stated, when he determined to offer the tracts separately, that he would return to the bid of $1,200 for the whole, and would sell it in which ever mode he could obtain the most money, and failing to do so, bidders were deceived, and the property was thus sacrificed.
On the question of the value of the property, there is great contrariety of opinion. Some witnesses fix its value at $2,500, and one or two even as high as $3,000. Many, and perhaps the larger number, say the property sold for its full value, and some that it brought more than it was worth. When all of the evidence is considered, we fail to see that there has been, if at all, any great sacrifice. For such a sale, it seems to have brought a fair price; it may not be its full value, but as near that sum as is usually obtained at similar sales. The weight of evidence would seem to prove that it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Barnes v. Henshaw
...appeal from the trial court that whether such an order is final and appealable is no longer open for consideration in this court. Duncan v. Sanders, 50 Ill. 475;Heberer v. Heberer, 67 Ill. 253;Sowards v. Pritchett, 37 Ill. 517;Quigley v. Breckenridge, 180 Ill. 627, 54 N. E. 580;Wilson v. Fo......
-
Holden v. Vaughan
...vs. Hartoop, 21 Bevan, 259. A. A. Tomlinson, for Defendant in Error, cited: Hann. & St. Joe. R. R. vs. Brown, 43 Mo. 294; Duncan vs. Saunders, 50 Ill. 475; Boyd vs. Ellis, 11 Iowa, 97; Wallace vs. Berger, 25 Iowa, 456; King vs. Thrope, 26 Iowa, 283. SHERWOOD, C. J., delivered the opinion of......
-
Quigley v. Breckenridge
...due regard must also be had to the policy of the law to give stability to such sales.’ Comstock v. Purple, 49 Ill. 158;Duncan v. Sanders, 50 Ill. 475;Heberer v. Heberer, 67 Ill. 253. None of the parties here were minors, or under any disability. The decision of the court below was not made ......
-
Johnson v. Avery
... ... sufficient cause to set aside the sale unless it is so ... grossly inadequate as to establish fraud. Comstock v ... Purple, 49 Ill. 158; Duncan v. Sanders, 50 Ill ... 475; Kloepping v. Stellmacher, 21 N. J. Eq., 328; ... Smith v. Duncan, 16 N. J. Eq., 240; Marlatt v ... Warwick, 18 N. J ... ...