Terrell Et Al v. Allison

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtFIELD
Citation88 U.S. 289,22 L.Ed. 634,21 Wall. 289
PartiesTERRELL ET AL. v. ALLISON
Decision Date01 October 1874

88 U.S. 289
22 L.Ed. 634
21 Wall. 289
TERRELL ET AL.
v.
ALLISON.
October Term, 1874

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, from a decree awarding a writ of assistance to put the purchaser in possession of mortgaged property sold under a decree of the court, and to remove the appellants from the premises.

The case arose in this wise:

In April, 1866, one Vaugh A. Hilburn, a resident of Mississippi, executed to Hugh Allison and others a mortgage upon certain real property situated in that State, to secure the payment of his promissory note of the same date for $12,000, payable in March of the following year. In April, 1867, the mortgagor sold and conveyed the premises for a valuable consideration to one Eliza Kyle, and placed her at the time in possession. In May, 1871, Mrs. Kyle sold and conveyed the property upon like consideration to one Terrell, and he afterwards transferred a part of his interest to his brother, and they were the parties whose removal the decree directed.

In April, 1868, the mortgagees instituted suit in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Mississippi to foreclose the mortgage, or, more accurately speaking, to obtain a decree for the sale of the mortgaged premises, and

Page 290

the application of the proceeds of the sale to the payment of the amount which might be found due to them on the note secured. In this suit Hilburn and his wife, who had joined with him in the execution of the mortgage, were alone made parties. The case proceeded to a final decree, confirming a master's report, finding that $2400 were due the mortgagees, and directing its payment within a designated period, or, in default of such payment, that the premises be sold by a commissioner appointed for that purpose, at auction, to the highest bidder; that a deed be executed to the purchaser, and that he be placed in possession of the premises. The payment directed not being made, the premises were sold by the commissioner and purchased by Hugh Allison, one of the mortgagees; the sale was confirmed and a deed executed by the commissioner to the purchaser. The two Terrells then in possession refused to surrender the premises to the purchaser, and he thereupon applied by petition to the court for a writ of assistance to be issued to the marshal to place him in possession. The court granted the writ, directing the officer to go upon the land and eject the Terrells and place the purchaser in possession. Subsequently this writ was revoked and an order was made that the Terrells show cause why the writ should not issue on the petition filed. In response to this order the Terrells set up the sale and conveyance of the premises to Mrs. Kyle by the mortgagor and his placing her in possession before suit commenced, and the subsequent purchase by them from her, producing at the same time the conveyance from the mortgagor to her, and from her to one of them. And they insisted that Mrs. Kyle was a necessary party to the foreclosure suit, and that the decree directing the sale of the premises was void as to her and as to them as purchasers under her. No replication to the answer was made, nor does it appear from the record that any question was raised as to the correctness of its statements. The court, it would seem, considered the facts disclosed insufficient, for it dismissed the answer and made a decree that an alias writ of assistance issue. From this decree the appeal was taken.

Page 291

Messrs. P. Phillips, Nugent, and Yerger, for...

To continue reading

Request your trial
44 practice notes
  • State v. Roat, Nos. 113
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Kansas
    • June 19, 2020
    ...in court." See In re Oliver , 333 U.S. 257, 273, 68 S. Ct. 499, 92 L. Ed. 682 (1948) ; Terrell v. Allison , 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 289, 292, 22 L. Ed. 634 (1874) ; Jackson v. City of Bloomfield , 731 F.2d 652, 655 (10th Cir. 1984). The expeditious disposition of cases does not supersede " ‘one'......
  • Lamb v. Cramer, No. 432
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 14, 1932
    ...33 L. Ed. 178; Tilton v. Cofield, 93 U. S. 163, 23 L. Ed. 858; Warren v. Marcy, 97 U. S. 96, 105, 24 L. Ed. 977; cf. Terrell v. Allison, 21 Wall. 289, 22 L. Ed. 634. The provision in the decree that it should be without prejudice to the rights of Lamb postponed until further order of the co......
  • Tropic Builders, Limited v. Naval Ammunition Depot Lualualei Quarters, Inc., No. 4370
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Hawai'i
    • April 20, 1965
    ...as the court was powerless to enforce the decree of forecelosure if rendered in its absence. Terrell v. Allison, 21 Wall. (88 U.S.) 289, 22 L.Ed. 634; Hopper v. Lincoln, 12 Haw. 352, The question arises whether the appellants have a justiciable interest sufficient to enable them to question......
  • Stevens v. Loomis, No. 6268.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • June 23, 1964
    ...tied in to the cause, Thayer v. Life Ass'n of America, 1885, 112 U.S. 717, 5 S.Ct. 355, 28 L.Ed. 864; Terrell v. Allison, 1874, 21 Wall. 289, 22 L.Ed. 634; Barney v. City of Baltimore, 1867, 6 Wall. 280, 18 L.Ed. 825, or where the relief really is sought against the absent party alone, Kend......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
45 cases
  • State v. Roat, Nos. 113
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Kansas
    • June 19, 2020
    ...in court." See In re Oliver , 333 U.S. 257, 273, 68 S. Ct. 499, 92 L. Ed. 682 (1948) ; Terrell v. Allison , 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 289, 292, 22 L. Ed. 634 (1874) ; Jackson v. City of Bloomfield , 731 F.2d 652, 655 (10th Cir. 1984). The expeditious disposition of cases does not supersede " ‘one'......
  • Lamb v. Cramer, No. 432
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 14, 1932
    ...33 L. Ed. 178; Tilton v. Cofield, 93 U. S. 163, 23 L. Ed. 858; Warren v. Marcy, 97 U. S. 96, 105, 24 L. Ed. 977; cf. Terrell v. Allison, 21 Wall. 289, 22 L. Ed. 634. The provision in the decree that it should be without prejudice to the rights of Lamb postponed until further order of the co......
  • Tropic Builders, Limited v. Naval Ammunition Depot Lualualei Quarters, Inc., No. 4370
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Hawai'i
    • April 20, 1965
    ...as the court was powerless to enforce the decree of forecelosure if rendered in its absence. Terrell v. Allison, 21 Wall. (88 U.S.) 289, 22 L.Ed. 634; Hopper v. Lincoln, 12 Haw. 352, The question arises whether the appellants have a justiciable interest sufficient to enable them to question......
  • Stevens v. Loomis, No. 6268.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • June 23, 1964
    ...tied in to the cause, Thayer v. Life Ass'n of America, 1885, 112 U.S. 717, 5 S.Ct. 355, 28 L.Ed. 864; Terrell v. Allison, 1874, 21 Wall. 289, 22 L.Ed. 634; Barney v. City of Baltimore, 1867, 6 Wall. 280, 18 L.Ed. 825, or where the relief really is sought against the absent party alone, Kend......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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