Dickerson v. Collins
Dickerson v. Collins
Opinion of the Court
This must be considered as a sale, and the sum bid, as the price or purchase money; and as the parties had contracted that bond and security should be given for the purchase money, with interest from the date, Dickerson becoming the highest bidder, Collins is entitled to one half of the purchase money, with interest thereon, from the day of sale until paid. And on receiving the principal and interest, he shall all do such acts as shall secure to the defendant Dickerson, an estate in fee-simple, in said lands.
Taylor.—I cannot, after a frequent revision of my first impressions in this case, reconcile my mind to any other construction of the agreement, than that which requires the purchaser to give bond and security for the whole amount of the purchase money. There is surely weight in the argument, that as the bidding was confined to the partners, the purchaser cannot be understood to have bought his own right, which remained as it was before the sale, and could not be an ingredient, in his estimation of the price. The spirit of the
Hall,—It is the wish of the parties, that this agreement should be carried into effect. Collins insists that he is intitled to half, and not a third only, of the purchase money; Dickerson insists, and Allen agrees with him in opinion, that he is intitled only to a third of it. I think it must have been the understanding of the parties that bonds should be executed, in a reasonable time after the sale; otherwise interest from the sale to the time of executing them would be lost. It is true, Dickerson alledges as a reason for not having made a tender of them sooner, the difficulty he met with in procuring a deed to be drawn for the land, which would meet with the approbation of Collins. Be this as it may, I think Collins is entitled to interest from the time of the sale to the time of the tender of the bonds, on whatever
It is no matter for whose benefit it was bid off by Dickerson, provided, he acted up to that agreement. When £ 3060 were bid for the land, Collins might have bid more, if he thought that sum under the full value; he did not chuse to do so, because (the presumption is) he supposed it was not worth more. If indeed Collins had not been able to purchase their rights, upon the terms on which the sale took place, or if he had been misled by false appearances, by them held out for that purpose, and on either of these accounts the land had fold for less than its value, because they did not bid against each other, and that for the purpose of defrauding him, there would be something in the allegation. This, however, it does not appear was the case. I am therefore of opinion, that Collins is entitled to one third of the purchase money only, with interest thereon from the time of the sale until he refused to execute the deed, &c. that from that time until he shall execute the deed, interest shall stop; that Dickerson upon the execution of a sufficient deed, shall either pay the aforesaid principal and interest, or cause the sum to be paid in a short time.
Decree.—That the purchase money, that is to say, the one half of the sum bid, with interest from the day of sale, be paid to Josiah Collins; and on the receipt of said sum and interest, that Josiah Collins shall convey the land so purchased in see.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Samuel Dickerson v. Josiah Collins and Nathaniel Allen and Josiah Collins v. Samuel Dickerson and Nathaniel Allen
- Status
- Published