US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

LEVI V. THOMPSON, 45 U. S. 17 (1846)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 45 U. S. 17 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Levi v. Thompson, 45 U.S. 4 How. 17 17 (1846)

Levi v. Thompson

45 U.S. (4 How.) 17


The holder of a register's certificate of the purchase of a lot in the Town of Dubuque, lawfully acquired, and issued by the register under the two acts of 2 July, 1836, and 3 March, 1837, has such an equitable estate in the lot, before the issuing of a patent, as will subject the lot to sale under execution under the statute of Iowa.

The doctrine established in the case of Carroll v. Safford, 3 How. 441, reviewed and confirmed.

The commissioners under the Act of 3 March, 1837, amendatory of the act entitled "An act for laying off the Towns of Fort Madison," &c., approved July 2, 1836, confirmed unto Alexander Levi and John Thompson, as tenants in common, the right of purchase, by preemption, of lot No. 68, in the Town of Dubuque, being of the first class, containing seventeen one hundredths of an acre. The lot was entered in the land office, and the receiver's receipt given to Levi and Thompson for the purchase money, on 1 April, 1840. It appears that William Chilson and Joel Campbell had instituted a suit, on the common law side of the District Court of Dubuque County, against Levi and Thompson, and that judgment was rendered against them for $780.50 and costs of suit, in August, 1839. Execution was issued upon the judgment in due form of law; it was placed in the sheriff's hands to be executed, and he levied upon the lot for which Lee and Thompson had a preemption certificate, and the same was sold to satisfy the execution, before a patent had been issued chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 45 U. S. 18

by the United States to Levi and Thompson for the same. Thompson, the tenant in common with Levi, became the purchaser, paid the purchase money, and took the sheriff's deed for the same. Thompson, in November, 1841, sold the lot to the other defendants, who had paid for the same before Levi sued out his bill. They state, in their answer to Levi's bill, that when they bought the lot from Thompson, they were informed by him, and so supposed the fact to be, that he had a full and perfect right thereto, free from all encumbrances and of all claim by any other person or persons, and that at the time of their purchase, and when they made the payments to Thompson for the same, they were utterly ignorant of any title or claim to property in Levi, or that he set up or pretended to have any claim or title to the same. That the first notice they had of any such claim by Levi was about three weeks before the date of their answer to his bill, when he sent them word that he desired them to make a division of the property with him. They further state, at the time of their purchase there was a small log house upon the lot, of little or no value to them, which they tore down and removed. That they went into quiet and peaceable possession of the lot at the time of their purchase, and have so remained ever since; that they had made lasting and valuable improvements upon the lot; that for a considerable part of the time whilst they were making these improvements, Levi had been in the City of Dubuque, and they believe must have discovered them, as he frequently passed and repassed the lot, and never informed them of his having any claim to the same. The cause was tried in the district court, upon the bill and answers of the defendants, and the court adjudged that the petition of the complainant should be dismissed. An appeal was taken to the supreme court, and that court affirmed the decree of the court below; and from that court it has been brought to this Court by appeal. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 45 U. S. 19

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™