Hill v. Gregory
Court | Supreme Court of Arkansas |
Writing for the Court | Bunn |
Citation | 42 S.W. 408 |
Decision Date | 16 October 1897 |
Parties | HILL v. GREGORY. |
v.
GREGORY.
Appeal from circuit court, Woodruff county; H. N. Hutton, Judge.
Ejectment by Minor Gregory, administrator, etc., of Nathan Gregory, deceased, against Frank P. Hill. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
M. T. Sanders, for appellant. P. R. Andrews, N. W. Norton, and Rose, Hemingway & Rose, for appellee.
BUNN, C. J.
One W. A. Chaney executed his promissory note and deed of trust with power of sale to secure said note to one W. R. Spivey on the 19th day of January, 1885, said note being due and payable on the 15th day of November, 1885. On the 21st day of February, 1885, said W. A. Chaney executed and delivered his other promissory note to Nathan Gregory, due and payable on the 15th of November, 1885, and to secure the same executed and delivered to E. G. Thompson, as trustee, his deed of trust, in which, for the purpose aforesaid, the same property was conveyed as in the deed of trust or mortgage given to W. R. Spivey aforesaid. The mortgage was duly filed for record in the recorder's office of Woodruff county, where the property is situate, on the 23d of January, 1885, and the deed of trust presumably was filed for record on the day of its execution. Spivey transferred the note and mortgage to one R. N. Moreland on July 8, 1893, and the latter, in pursuance of the power contained in the mortgage, sold the property therein conveyed to satisfy said note, the balance then due and unpaid being $600; and at this sale the appellant, Frank P. Hill, became the purchaser, and received his deed accordingly, and was put into possession in due time, to wit, January 13, 1894, and was in possession at the institution of this suit. His said deed of record was duly filed for record on the 24th of January, 1894. The appellee, as the administrator of the estate of Nathan Gregory, then deceased, instituted his suit to foreclose his said deed of trust, and decree was entered, on failure of defendant Chaney to answer, on the 21st of August, 1893, and one Ed Roddy was appointed commissioner to sell and make deeds to the property condemned, who accordingly sold to the appellee, Minor Gregory, as administrator of said estate, and executed and delivered to him his deed, date February 24, 1894. Thereafter the appellee, Minor Gregory, administrator aforesaid, upon his said deed brought his suit against appellant, Frank P. Hill, on the 29th of January, 1895,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
...Minn. 67, 53 N. W. 1130;Duty v. Graham, 12 Tex. 427, 62 Am. Dec. 534;Hurley v. Cox, 9 Neb. 230, 2 N. W. 705;Hill v. Gregory, 64 Ark. 317, 42 S. W. 408;Law v. Spence, 5 Idaho, 244, 48 Pac. 282;Harding v. Durand, 138 Ill. 515, 28 N. E. 948; Hubbard v. Missouri Ins. Co., 25 Kan. 172; Culp v. C......
-
Ed. Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
...67 (53 N.W. 1130); Duty v. Graham, 12 Tex. 427 (62 Am. Dec. 534); Hurley v. Cox, 9 Neb. 230 (2 N.W. 705); Hill v. Gregory, 64 Ark. 317 (42 S.W. 408); Law v. Spence, 5 Idaho 244 (48 P. 282); Harding v. Durand, 138 Ill. 515 (28 N.E. 948); Hubbard v. Missouri Ins. Co., 25 Kan. 172; Culp v. Cul......
-
Gregg v. Williamson, No. 455
...H. K. L. Realty Corp. v. Kirtley, Fla., 74 So.2d 876; Shanks v. Blaine's Heirs, 201 Okl. 350, 206 P.2d 978; Hill v. Gregory, 64 Ark. 317, 42 S.W. 408; Rombotis v. Fink, 89 Cal.App.2d 378, 201 P.2d 588; Annotation 121 A.L.R. 909; Annotation 158 A.L.R. 1043; 45 Am.Jur. 437; 16 A C.J.S. Consti......
-
Morton v. Tullgren, No. 77-241
...apply to any cause of action which has not been barred at the time the new statute becomes effective. See Hill v. Gregory, 64 Ark. 317, 42 S.W. 408. The critical question is one of legislative intent. There is a split of authority on the subject, and it appears that it may be the view of a ......
-
Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
...Minn. 67, 53 N. W. 1130;Duty v. Graham, 12 Tex. 427, 62 Am. Dec. 534;Hurley v. Cox, 9 Neb. 230, 2 N. W. 705;Hill v. Gregory, 64 Ark. 317, 42 S. W. 408;Law v. Spence, 5 Idaho, 244, 48 Pac. 282;Harding v. Durand, 138 Ill. 515, 28 N. E. 948; Hubbard v. Missouri Ins. Co., 25 Kan. 172; Culp v. C......
-
Ed. Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
...67 (53 N.W. 1130); Duty v. Graham, 12 Tex. 427 (62 Am. Dec. 534); Hurley v. Cox, 9 Neb. 230 (2 N.W. 705); Hill v. Gregory, 64 Ark. 317 (42 S.W. 408); Law v. Spence, 5 Idaho 244 (48 P. 282); Harding v. Durand, 138 Ill. 515 (28 N.E. 948); Hubbard v. Missouri Ins. Co., 25 Kan. 172; Culp v. Cul......
-
Gregg v. Williamson, No. 455
...H. K. L. Realty Corp. v. Kirtley, Fla., 74 So.2d 876; Shanks v. Blaine's Heirs, 201 Okl. 350, 206 P.2d 978; Hill v. Gregory, 64 Ark. 317, 42 S.W. 408; Rombotis v. Fink, 89 Cal.App.2d 378, 201 P.2d 588; Annotation 121 A.L.R. 909; Annotation 158 A.L.R. 1043; 45 Am.Jur. 437; 16 A C.J.S. Consti......
-
Morton v. Tullgren, No. 77-241
...apply to any cause of action which has not been barred at the time the new statute becomes effective. See Hill v. Gregory, 64 Ark. 317, 42 S.W. 408. The critical question is one of legislative intent. There is a split of authority on the subject, and it appears that it may be the view of a ......