Spencer v. Jennings

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Spencer v. Jennings, 139 Pa. 198 (Pa. 1891)
21 A. 73; 1891 Pa. LEXIS 973
Clark, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Pee, Sterrett, Utmam, Williams

Spencer v. Jennings

Opinion of the Court

Pee, C utmam:

■ It was decided in Spencer v. Jennings, 123 Pa. 184, that the mortgage under which the premises in controversy were sold was void, for the reason that the Orphans’ Court of Allegheny county had no jurisdiction to authorize it. From this the conclusion logically follows that the plaintiffs are not bound or affected by the proceedings under that mortgage, and their title to the real estate is not divested. It is now claimed that they cannot recover in this ejectment for the reasons, (a) that they have been guilty of laches, and (5) that they have received or participated in the enjoyment of the purchase money. It may be conceded that, had they knowingly received the pur-*201cbase money, they would be estopped from recovering the land, for equity would not permit them to have both the land and its price. Just here the defendants’ case fails. The learned judge below correctly held that there was not sufficient evidence to submit to the jury, that the plaintiffs knowingly received any money or property, the proceeds of the mortgage on the subsequent sale on it. The defence of the plaintiffs’ laches is untenable. They were minors at the time of the transaction, and no laches can be imputed to them until after them arrival at age. After that period they had twenty-one years in which to assert their rights.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
J. SPENCER v. B. JENNINGS
Cited By
5 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Lands of a decedent were sold in 1867, under a mortgage executed by tbe decedent’s administrator which was without authority and therefore void. The right of the heirs to recover the lands by ejectment brought in 1884, was unaffected by laches alleged, or by the fact that, while they were minors but without their knowledge, a portion of the proceeds of the mortgage sale were received by the administrator and invested in other lands, the title to which, on the death of the life-tenant in 1880, vested in fee in the plaintiffs.