Young v. Morgan

• Decision Date: 30 June 1878
• Parties: JAMES C. YOUNGv.WILLIAM H. MORGAN.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

89 Ill. 199

1878 WL 10002 (Ill.)

JAMES C. YOUNG

v.WILLIAM H. MORGAN.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June Term, 1878.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Marion county; the Hon. AMOS WATTS, Judge, presiding.

Mr. J. B. KAGY, for the appellant.

Mr. HENRY C. GOODNOW, for the appellee.

Mr. JUSTICE SHELDON delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was a bill in chancery to remove an alleged cloud upon title occasioned by the sale of premises under execution.

The premises were 46 1/2 acres of land owned by Philip C. Whitehead, who, in November, 1873, executed a trust deed upon the same to one Marshfield Steele to secure the payment to Steele of a promissory note made by Whitehead for the sum of $200, payable twelve months after date. Whitehead had a homestead interest in the premises.

In February, 1876, Whitehead conveyed the premises, with a release of the homestead, to the appellee, William H. Morgan, for the consideration expressed of $1362.51, a part of the consideration being the sum of $205, the amount due on the trust deed to Steele, which Morgan at the same time paid off and discharged, Steele executing a release of the trust deed bearing the same date with the conveyance to Morgan.

In March, 1875, James C. Young filed in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of the county in which the premises were situate, transcripts of two judgments before a justice of the peace in his favor against Whitehead, which thereupon, under the statute, became liens upon the lands of Whitehead in the county, the same as if the judgments had been obtained in the circuit court.

In July, 1876, executions were issued from the clerk's office of the circuit court on the judgments, in favor of Young, against Whitehead, which executions the sheriff levied upon the premises as the property of Whitehead. The sheriff summoned three commissioners, under the homestead act, who appraised the premises at $1150, and set off 34 acres for the homestead, leaving the residue, 12 1/2 acres, to be sold under the execution, which was accordingly so sold by the sheriff to Young for $112.97, on the 12th of August, 1876, and a certificate of purchase issued to him, which was filed and recorded in the proper office. The bill is by Morgan, to set aside this sale under execution, claiming that the trust deed was a prior lien to the judgments, and that Morgan should have the benefit thereof, as such. The decree granted the relief prayed by the bill, and the defendant appealed.

The homestead right here was not subject to a judgment lien, but as the homestead property exceeded $1000 in value, a judgment or deed of trust became a lien that might be enforced against the overplus, above that value. McDonald v. Crandall, 43 Ill. 232. The trust deed here was the older and paramount lien to that of the judgments, and had the question been one between Steele, to whom the trust deed was given, his debt being unpaid, and Young, the judgment creditor, there can be no doubt the former would have been entitled to precedence; and the point of inquiry is, whether the same preference exists in favor of the appellee, Morgan, who paid to Steele the debt secured by his trust deed. It is the manifest right and equity of the case...