Shields v. Ashley's Adm'r
| Citation | 16 Mo. 471 |
| Parties | SHIELDS, Appellant, v. ASHLEY'S ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 31 July 1852 |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
1. In a proceeding before a County Court by an administrator, to obtain an order for the sale of real estate claimed as belonging to the estate of his intestate, a party cannot interfere and resist the order of sale on the ground that he has a superior title. Such a person is not “ interested in the estate,” within the meaning of the 24th section, of article 3, of the act concerning administration (R. S. 1845).
2. County Courts have no jurisdiction to try titles to land.
Appeal from Benton Circuit Court.
Ballou, for appellant.
F. P. Wright, for respondent.
1. This appeal was taken from the County Court, upon its refusal to set aside the previous order of sale, and though the statute allows an appeal from orders for the sale of real estate, yet it does not allow an appeal in a case like the present (See R. C. 106), and on this ground alone the court did right in dismissing the appeal.
2. The County Court did right in refusing the motion of Shields to set aside the order of sale. He did not make it apparent to the County Court that he was interested in the estate, and no persons but those interested in the estate had a right to appear, even in the first instance. R. C., section 24, article 3. Due notice of the application had been published. Shields did not even offer to appear and resist the application. Nor did he show to the County Court any legal excuse for not doing so; and unless he had shown himself interested in the estate, the County Court should not have allowed the appeal, and the Circuit Court did right in dismissing it.
3. Even if Shields had shown to the court that he was the purchaser of the land, it would not have entitled him to appear in the County Court and resist the order. The lands, at any rate, belonged to Ashley at the time of his death. It was the duty of the administrator to sell all of Ashley's interest therein for the payment of debts. The County Court have no authority to try the title. Nor did Shields become interested in the estate by purchasing the land, so as to entitle him to appear in the County Court and resist the order of sale. None but the heirs can be said to be interested.
This was a proceeding begun by Atkinson, administrator of Ashley, in the Benton County Court, for the purpose of obtaining an order for the sale of the real estate belonging to the said Ashley, for the payment of debts due from his estate. Shields, who claimed the lands sought to be sold by virtue of a sale of them, made in a suit in chancery against a former administrator of Ashley, and his heirs and widow came in and opposed the motion, or rather asked to have the order of sale set aside after it was made. This was refused by the County Court, and on an appeal to the Circuit Court by Shields, his appeal was dismissed, and he appealed to this court.
1. There is no ground for maintaining that under our law of administration a proceeding to sell real estate is analogous to the proceedings in rem in courts of admiralty; and that orders of sale obtained in such a procedure have the same effect as a judgment in rem in those courts. The statute which declares that the deed given in pursuance to such sales shall...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Switzer
...aggrieved so as to be entitled to an appeal only when the decree operates upon his property or bears upon his interest directly. Shields v. Ashley, 16 Mo. 471; v. Adams, 34 Me. 44; Bank v. Young, 53 Me. 555; Woodbury v. Hammond, 54 Me. 332; Tuxbury's Appeal, 67 Me. 270; Black v. Kirgan, 15 ......
-
Hines v. Hines
...Bertram, 198 Mo. 328; Baker v. Henderson, 156 Mo. 366. (26) Our probate courts have no jurisdiction to adjudicate on land titles. Shields v. Ashley, 16 Mo. 471. (27) 3135, 4636 are in conflict. Hence the older is repealed or modified by the later statute. Rorer on Interstate Law, 264. (28) ......
-
Gunby v. Brown
...should have resisted the order of sale if interested in the estate and have appealed therefrom. Callahan v. Griswold, 9 Mo. 784; Shields v. Ashley 16 Mo. 471; Langworthy v. Baker, 23 Ill. 484; Hopkins v. McCann, 19 Ill. 484; Colson v. Baker, 1 Redf. 324; Hunter v. French, 86 Ind. A resort t......
-
Higbee v. Billick
...86 Mo.App. 672. (5) The purchaser at an administrator's sale takes only such title as a decedent had at the time of his death. Shields v. Ashley, 16 Mo. 471. (6) Every in writing that conveys any real estate or whereby any real estate may be affected in law or in equity, proved or acknowled......