Rankin Schatzell Scott

Decision Date23 January 1827
Citation25 U.S. 177,6 L.Ed. 592,12 Wheat. 177
PartiesRANKIN & SCHATZELL, Plaintiffs in Error, against SCOTT, Defendant in Error
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

This was an action of ejectment, brought in the Court below by the defendant in error, Scott, to recover the possession of a house and lot in the town of St. Louis.At the trial, a special verdict was found, stating, that in the year 1816, John Little married Marie Antoinette Labadie, who was then seised in fee of the house and lot in question.She died without issue, leaving the husband seised in fee of a moiety of the premises.He soon afterwards died without issue, and intestate.In April, 1821, judgment was rendered in the Circuit Court of the county where the premises lay, against the administrator of Little, in favour of Schatzell and another, for 2,747 dollars and 19 cents.In March following, another judgment was rendered against the same, in favour of B. Pratte, for 1,241 dollars.Execution was immediately issued upon the latter judgment, and the premises in question sold under it to Scott, the plaintiff in ejectment; and soon afterwards, another execution issued upon the first judgment, and the same premises were sold to Schatzell, one of the defendants below, and conveyed to him by the sheriff's deed.Rankin, who was tenant to Little in his lifetime, remained in possession of the premises after his death and attorned to Schatzell.The question raised upon these facts was, whether the sale by the Sheriff, under the second judgment and first execution, devested the lien of the first judgment?The Court below determined it in the affirmative; and the cause was brought, by writ of error, before this Court.

Jan. 15th.

Mr. Benton, for the plaintiffs in error, relied upon the express provisions of the statute of Missouri, to show that the local law made the first judgment a lien upon the land for the term of five years, within which time it was enforced, and Shatzell purchased under it.a For the general effect of a judgment lien, he cited the authorities in the margin.b

Mr. Talbot, contra.c

Jan. 23d.

Mr. Chief Justice MARSHALLdelivered the opinion of the Court, and after stating the case, proceeded as follows:

The act of the then territorial government of Missouri, on which this question depends, is in these words: 'Judgments obtained in the General Court shall be a lien on the lands and tenements of the person or persons against whom the same has been entered, situate in any part of this territory; and judgments obtained in a Court of Common Pleas of any district, shall be a lien on the lands and tenements of the person against whom the same has been entered, situate in such district.'The act contains a proviso, 'that no judgment hereafter entered in any Court of record within this territory, shall continue a lien on the lands and tenements against whom the same has been entered, during a longer term than five years from the first return day of the term of which such judgment may be entered, unless the same shall have been revived by scire facias,' &c.

Since the territory of Missouri was erected into a State, the General Court has received the appellation of the Superior Court, and the Court of Common Pleas for the district has been denominated the Circuit Court for the county.The execution on the first judgment was issued within a short time after it was rendered, and while the...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
128 cases
  • WT JONES AND COMPANY v. Foodco Realty, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Virginia
    • 15 Junio 1962
    ...is determined by another principle of law, namely, `the first in time is the first in right.' As stated by Chief Justice Marshall in Rankin v. Scott 12 Wheat. 177, 6 L.Ed. 592, supra: "`The principle is believed to be universal, that a prior lien gives a prior claim, which is entitled to pr......
  • Pasco v. Harley
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 3 Abril 1917
    ...lien is as binding as a mortgage, and has the same capacity to hold land, so long as the statute preserves its force. Rankin v. Scott, 12 Wheat. 177, 6 L.Ed. 592. There can be no difference in principle between a and a statutory lien. The one is as binding as the other. Andrews v. Doe ex de......
  • United States v. State of Vermont
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 9 Mayo 1963
    ...the same nature, the case would be governed by the "cardinal rule" laid down by Chief Justice Marshall in Rankin & Schatzell v. Scott, 12 Wheat. (25 U.S.) 177, 179, 6 L.Ed. 592 (1827): "The principle is believed to be universal that a prior lien gives a prior claim, which is entitled to pri......
  • In re Weninger
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Colorado
    • 12 Junio 1990
    ...Insurance, supra 374 U.S. at 87, 83 S.Ct. at 1654; City of New Britain, supra 347 U.S. at 85-86, 74 S.Ct. at 370; Rankin v. Scott, 25 U.S. (12 Wheat.) 177, 6 L.Ed. 592 (1827).12 Choate state-created liens take priority over later federal tax liens; inchoate liens do not. Assured Investment ......
  • Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
  • Section 3 The Two General Priority Principles
    • United States
    • The Missouri Bar Secured Transactions Deskbook Chapter 6 Priorities
    • Invalid date
    ...interest. The “first in time” principle has its roots deep in the common law and was carried forward into the UCC. Rankin v. Scott, 25 U.S. 177, 179 (1827) (priority of judicial liens on Missouri real property determined by “first in time”). This chapter focuses on the exceptions to these t......
  • Section 6.2 General Priority Principles for Security Interests
    • United States
    • The Missouri Bar Creditors' Remedies Deskbook Chapter 6 Priorities Among Claims and Liens
    • Invalid date
    ...subsequent interest. The "first in time" principle came to the Uniform Commercial Code from deep roots in the common law. Rankin v. Scott, 25 U.S. 177, 179 (1827) (priority of judicial liens on Missouri real property determined by "first in time"). These priority guidelines break down princ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT