Taylor v. Wilson

• Decision Date: 27 November 1936
• Docket Number: 5 Div. 225
• Citation: 233 Ala. 182,170 So. 833
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court
• Parties: TAYLOR v. WILSON et al.

170 So. 833

233 Ala. 182

TAYLOR v. WILSON et al.

5 Div. 225

Supreme Court of Alabama

November 27, 1936

Appeal from Circuit Court, Chilton County; Arthur Glover, Judge.

Bill to sell land for division by W.D. Taylor against Lottie Wilson and others. From a decree setting sale aside and ordering a resale, complainant appeals.

Affirmed with directions.

Lawrence F. Gerald and Raymond C. Smith, both of Clanton, for appellant.

Victor J. Heard, of Clanton, for appellees.

KNIGHT Justice.

The bill in this cause was filed in the circuit court of Chilton county, in equity, by the appellant here seeking to have certain lands sold for division among the tenants in common thereof. The complainant owned three-sevenths undivided interest in the land, and the respondents Estoria Wilson Williams, Mary Wilson Hughes, and Lottie Wilson each owned a one-seventh interest, while the respondents Reuben Wilson and Tishie Wilson each owned a one-fourteenth interest. The last two named respondents were minors, and were represented by a duly appointed guardian ad litem.

The cause proceeded to a decree of sale, and all proceedings had up to and including the order of sale seem to be regular, and no point is here made questioning the regularity of the decree directing a sale of the property for division among the several joint owners.

The question here presented for our determination is the propriety of the court's orders setting aside the sale and ordering a resale of the property.

At the sale, the appellant was the highest bidder, and became the purchaser at and for the sum of $425. The register made due report of the sale to the court on February 4, 1936. This report recited:

"That he did on the 4th day of February sell the above described real estate at public sale to the highest bidder for cash in front of the courthouse of said county, after advertising the same as directed by the court and that W.D Taylor became the purchaser at and for the sum of $425.00 which sum is considered not greatly disproportionate to the value of same.

"I further report that the purchaser has paid to the register the amount of his bid."

On the second day of March, thereafter, and before the confirmation of the sale, the guardian ad litem for the minors filed in the cause a motion praying that the sale of the property be not confirmed, alleging that the property sold for an amount greatly less than its real value, in fact, less than one-half of its real value, and further alleged that a bona fide purchaser had been secured who was ready, willing, and able to pay the sum of $700 for the land, and to show his good faith had filed his certified check for that amount, payable to the register, "as said purchaser's initial bid for said land at any resale thereof."

On March 21, 1936, the court made and entered an order setting aside the sale, and ordering a resale of the property under the "terms, conditions and instructions of the former decree."

On April 17, 1936, the said W.D. Taylor filed motion to vacate the order of March 21, 1936, ordering a resale of the property. Numerous grounds were assigned, among them: That the sale, at which he became the purchaser, was made in all respects according to law, and that the price for which the land was sold was not greatly disproportionate to its real value; that the land "was worth very little, if any, more than the price for which it sold"; that after the sale, and in good faith, and before a motion was made to vacate the sale, he (purchaser) had made considerable and necessary repairs, etc., the cost and value of which repairs amounted to about the difference between the price for which the land was sold and the $700.00 now offered; and that the person who now offers to bid $700.00 for the land at a resale was present throughout the sale.

This motion was duly presented to the court, and was set down for hearing on April 27, 1936. On the hearing of appellant's motion, a large number of witnesses were examined ore tenus before the court, and at the conclusion of the evidence the court remarked to counsel: "I will tell you my idea about this: If Mr. Robinson wants to pay $900.00 let him put a check in here with the register, certified check, and he can countermand the check heretofore given, and I will let you sell it." To this Mr. Robinson replied: "It might bring more than that; somebody else might bid more for it. I have understood it might bring $1,000.00 or $1,200.00." The court: "You understand you are getting the first bid; if somebody else outbids you, you get your check back. Of course you could raise the bid to $1,000.00."

It was agreed by and between the parties to the cause that the said Robinson did in fact upon the hearing deposit with the register of the court $900 to guarantee a bid from him for that amount in the event the property was resold.

The court at the conclusion of the hearing entered a decree on appellant's said motion overruling the same.

The appellant, Taylor, examined a large number of witnesses whose testimony tended to show that the reasonable market value of the property was not in excess of the amount for which it sold at the register's sale, to wit, $425. One witness, W.C. Robinson, who owned adjacent lands, testified that its real market value was from $700 to $800, stating that he had tried to buy it for that amount but could not. He was then asked the following questions:

"Was that February 4th, or prior to the sale, or was it the date of the sale? Answer: Date of sale, yes, sir."

"Question: Is the $700.00 you offered for the land before the improvements that Mr. Taylor

...