Miller v. Am. Bank & Trust Co.
| Decision Date | 05 February 1935 |
| Docket Number | Case Number: 24433 |
| Parties | MILLER et al. v. AMERICAN BANK & TRUST CO. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
¶0 Execution - Sale of Incumbered Land - Appraisal of Value of Equity - Minimum Bid.
In the sale of incumbered land seized on execution, the equity in said land over and above the incumbrance should be appraised, and two-thirds of the value of such equity must be bid to justify a confirmation of the sale.
Appeal from District Court, Carter County; Asa E. Walden, Judge.
Action by the American Bank & Trust Company against J.M. Miller and another. Protest against confirmation of an execution sale overruled, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.
R.A. Howard, for plaintiffs in error.
Dolman, Dyer & Dolman, for defendant in error.
¶1 The record discloses that the defendant in error, the American Bank & Trust Company, of Ardmore, Okla., in a cause pending in the district court of Carter county, Okla., on the 21st day of August, 1931, procured a judgment, by default, after personal service, against the plaintiffs in error, J.M. Miller and Carrie Miller, defendants in said cause, upon a promissory note signed by them, in the sum of $4,827, with interest and attorney's fees, and that thereafter, on the 8th day of June, 1932, an execution upon the said judgment was duly issued and levied upon certain lands described in the record, consisting of an undivided one-half interest in one tract of land and all of another tract of land, both described in detail in the record.
¶2 It appears that the plaintiffs in error were owners of said property; that they for a number of years had permitted taxes to accumulate upon said property without payment.
¶3 That said execution was levied by the sheriff of Carter county upon the said described tracts of land on the 11th day of June, 1932, and three appraisers duly appointed to view and appraise the same. The said appraisers were appointed on the 10th day of June, 1932, and upon the same day filed their oaths, as required by law, and upon the 11th day of June, 1932, filed their return of appraisement, in which the said undivided one-half interest in the said tract of land was appraised at $89.47, subject to $102.53 unpaid taxes for 1930 and 1931; and the second tract of land was appraised at the sum of $50, subject to unpaid taxes for the years 1926 to 1931, both inclusive, in the sum of $635.81.
¶4 The said property was duly advertised for sale and sold to the defendant in error herein for the sum of $1,400 for the first described tract of land, and for the sum of $100 for the second, each of said sums being more than two-thirds of the appraised value of the said property.
¶5 On the 29th day of June, 1932, the plaintiffs in error filed their motion to vacate the appraisement of the said land, which was by the court heard and overruled, and thereafter the defendant in error, as purchaser of said property, filed its motion for a confirmation of said sale on the 21st day of June, 1932, which motion was contested by plaintiffs in error by their protest filed on the 22nd day of July, 1932, and the matter was thereafter, on the 10th of August, 1932, heard by the trial court and evidence in support of the contentions of the respective parties received; and the court, after hearing the said evidence and the objection of the plaintiffs in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Elstermeyer v. City of Cheyenne
...Reserve Bank, 11 Ohio 444; Bank v. Galbreath, 225 P. 97; Hewitt v. Voils et al., 296 P. 447; Cuff v. Koslosky, 25 P.2d 290; Miller v. Am. Bank, 40 P.2d 1074; Bell v. Trosper, 77 P.2d 544. The court never acquired jurisdiction, there having been no service. 34 C. J. 270. The judgment is cons......
-
Jacobs v. Am. Bank & Trust Co.
...as in the trial court and will be referred to as plaintiff and defendants. On February 5, 1935, in the case of Miller v. American Bank & Trust Company, 171 Okla. 99, 40 P.2d 1074, the action of the trial court in overruling objections to the confirmation of sheriff's sale of certain lands w......
-
U.S. v. Home Federal S. & L. Ass'n of Tulsa
...Okl. 9, 225 P. 971, also cited by the government; Hewitt v. Voils et al., 147 Okl. 270, 296 P. 447; and Miller et al., v. American Bank & Trust Co. of Ardmore, 171 Okl. 99, 40 P.2d 1074. In all of these cases this court held in substance and effect that when land that is seized under execut......
-
Jacobs v. American Bank & Trust Co.
... ... an appeal from a judgment of the district court of Carter ... county in an action for an injunction. The parties occupy the ... same positions here as in the trial court and will be ... referred to as plaintiff and defendants. On February 5, 1935, ... in the case of Miller v. American Bank & Trust ... Company, 171 Okl. 99, 40 P.2d 1074, the action of the ... trial court in overruling objections to the confirmation of ... sheriff's sale of certain lands was affirmed and petition ... for rehearing thereon was denied on March 12, 1935. In the ... above cause J. M ... ...