Shattuck v. Cox
| Decision Date | 20 June 1884 |
| Docket Number | 10,413 |
| Citation | 97 Ind. 242 |
| Parties | Shattuck v. Cox |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
Petition for a Rehearing Overruled Nov. 11, 1884.
From the Superior Court of Vigo County.
The judgment is reversed at appellee's costs, with instruction to the court below to render judgment for the appellant setting aside the sheriff's sale of his lands in Vigo county, described in his complaint, leaving other questions embraced in the special finding of facts to be settled between the parties in another action.
N. G Buff, J. T. Pierce, D. T. Morgan and S. Coulson, for appellant.
J. T Scott and C. F. McNutt, for appellee.
The appellant, who was plaintiff in the court below, demanded as relief in his complaint an accounting with the appellee, to ascertain the amount due the latter on his purchase at sheriff's sale of certain lands of the appellant in Vigo county. The appellee's answer was in four paragraphs, the first being the general denial, the second a special denial, and the third and fourth each called a counter-claim. Demurrers were filed and overruled to said third and fourth paragraphs. Reply in denial and by special paragraph. Trial by the court; special finding of facts; conclusions of law in favor of the appellee. The appellant moved for a venire de novo, for judgment in his favor upon the special finding of facts, and for a new trial. These motions were overruled, and the court rendered judgment dismissing the action at the appellant's costs.
The facts alleged in the appellant's complaint were to the effect following:
On January 21st, 1874, John Collier obtained judgment in the Sullivan Circuit Court against the appellant and his wife for $ 2,210 and the foreclosure of a mortgage. Under the foreclosure, the land therein described was sold at sheriff's sale to Collier, on August 29th, 1874, for $ 1,250. Appellant paid Collier on the judgment $ 500, on August 24th, 1875. On August 25th, 1875, Collier assigned the residue of the judgment and his certificate of purchase to the appellee. The latter afterwards obtained a sheriff's deed upon said certificate of purchase. Appellant subsequently made payments to appellee on the judgment, amounting to $ 329. A certified transcript of said judgment, rendered in the Sullivan Circuit Court, was filed in the office of the clerk of the Vigo Circuit Court, on April 29th, 1875. On this transcript, the appellee caused an execution to issue by the clerk of said Vigo Circuit Court, on August 5th, 1880, under which execution certain lands of the appellant in Vigo county were sold at sheriff's sale to the appellee, on November 11th, 1880, for $ 1,353, that being the balance of principal, interest and costs claimed by the appellee to be due upon said judgment. It is averred in the complaint that the amount due on the judgment at the time of the sale was only $ 500.
As no judgment was rendered in favor of the appellee upon either of his counter-claims, and as in our opinion none can be rendered thereon in the present action, the error, if any, of overruling the appellant's demurrer to said counter-claims was harmless.
The special finding of facts embraces many questions not properly in issue under the pleadings. It is found, however, that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
First Nat. Bank of Ft. Wayne v. Savin
...in one suit for all wrongs complained of growing out of the same transaction, and so put an end to the litigation.” See, also, Shattuck v. Cox, 97 Ind. 242. In view of the facts found in this case and the law as above expressed, appellant is in no position to complain of the second conclusi......
-
Wyoming Central Irr. Co v. LaPorte
...such cases must issue from the county where the judgment was rendered (Rev., §§ 3248, 3249; Seaton v. Hamilton, 10 Iowa 394)." In Shattuck v. Cox, 97 Ind. 242, the said: "The statute authorizes the transcript of a judgment to be filed in the office of any clerk of the Circuit Court in this ......
-
First National Bank v. Savin
... ... Presbyterian Church, ... supra, the court said: "The policy of the ... law is, so far as it can be done, to give a complete remedy ... in one suit for all wrongs complained of growing out of the ... same transaction, and so put an end to the litigation." ... See, also, Shattuck ... ...
-
Garnett v. Goldman
...134 P. 396; Seaton v. Hamilton, 10 Iowa 394; Furman v. Dewell, 35 Iowa 170; Mudge v. Livermore et al., 148 Iowa 472, 123 N.W. 199; Shattuck v. Cox, 97 Ind. 242; Lovelady v. Burgess, 32 Ore. 418, 52 P. 25; Bostwick et al. v. Benedict, 4 S.D. 414, 57 N.W. 78; Murray v. Briggs, 29 Wash. 245, 6......