Morton v. Carroll

Mississippi Supreme Court
Morton v. Carroll, 68 Miss. 699 (Miss. 1891)
Campbell

Morton v. Carroll

Opinion of the Court

Campbell, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The sale of the lot in controversy by order of the probate court was valid, and passed the title of the plaintiffs, heirs of Coleman. Process for the minors in the proceeding for the decree of sale was not necessary. Code of 1857, p. 463, art. 151; Stampley v. King, 51 Miss. 728; Burrus v. Burrus, 56 Ib. 92.

The law did not require a bond to be given by the guardian, code of 1857, 463, art. 151; and the court did not require one, and therefore none was necessary. Vanderberg v. Williamson, 52 Miss. 233.

Whether the decree required ten or thirty days’ notice of the sale is immaterial, as thirty days’ notice was given.

Any complaint of the way in which the widow’s claim of dower in the land was sold, and the division between her and the plain*703tiffs of the price for which the lot sold, is not involved in this case. The decree of sale being valid, and the sale having been confirmed, no question of mere error or not can. now be litigated collaterally. Notwithstanding errors in the trial, the result is right, and the judgment will be

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Julia A. Morton v. E. M. Carroll
Status
Published
Syllabus
1. Probate Court. Guardian’s sale of land. Process for minors. Code 1857, p. 463. Iu probate proceedings, under art. 151, p. 463, code 1857, by a guardian to sell lands of infant wards, it was not necessary to have process served on the wards. Stampley v. King, 51 Miss. 728 ; Burrus v. Burrus, 56 lb. 92. 2. Same. Guardian’s sale. Bond. Nor was it necessary, before making such sale, for the guardian to give a bond, unless specially required by the court. 3. Judicial Sale. Notice; 'longer than necessary. The giving of longer notice of sale than is required by the decree therefor does not render the sale invalid. 4. Decree eor Sale of Lakd. Confirmation. Irregularity. Collateral attach. Where lands of infant heirs have been sold by their guardian under a valid decree of the probate court, subject to widow’s dower, and the sale has been confirmed, it cannot be attacked collaterally by showing irregularity in the way in which the dower interest was sold and conveyed, and errors in the division of the proceeds between the widow and the minors.