Connell ex rel. Ellison & Sons v. Shryock

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania April 22, 1895

Connell ex rel. Ellison & Sons v. Shryock, 167 Pa. 483 (Pa. 1895)

31 A. 731; 1895 Pa. LEXIS 934

Dean, Fell, Green, Mitchell, Rett

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

There is nothing in the contract on which this suit is based that could by any possibility entitle the legal plaintiff to maintain an action against the defendant for the residue of purchase money, under said contract, after the former had sold and con*487veyed the same property to another person who paid him the full consideration for said conveyance. The learned 'judge' of the common pleas was therefore right in refusing plaintiff’s points for charge, and in directing a verdict for defendant. Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: Horatio P. Connell, Sheriff, to use of John B. Ellison & Sons v. William Knight Shryock
Cited By: 3 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Sheriff's sale — Resale—Suit.for amount hid. A sheriff cannot maintain an action to recover the amount of a hid at a sheriff’s sale of real estate after he has made a return of the writ under which the sale was made, setting forth that defendant had failed to pay. his bid, and after a subsequent sale and deed of the same property to another purchaser under a writ issued on another judgment, and distribution of the purchase money realized from the second sale.