Summary
In Ludlam v. Penna. Realty Co., 83 N.J. Eq. 130 (Ch. 1914), Vice-Chancellor Leaming remarked: "This jurisdiction of the law court exists until the process has been finally executed. * * * The amended bill, like the original bill, fails to disclose whether the sheriff's deed has been delivered."
Summary of this case from Masi v. MesticeOpinion
03-05-1914
LUDLAM v. PENNSYLVANIA REALTY CO. OF NEW JERSEY et al.
Matthew Jefferson, of Cape May Court House, for complainant. J. M. E. Hildreth, of Cape May, for demurrants.
Bill by Sallie T. Ludlam against the Pennsylvania Realty Company of New Jersey and others to set aside a sale of real estate. Demurrer to amended bill sustained.
Matthew Jefferson, of Cape May Court House, for complainant.
J. M. E. Hildreth, of Cape May, for demurrants.
LEAMING, V. C. At the hearing of a demurrer filed to the original bill, it was pointed out that this court will not entertain a bill to set aside a sale of real estate which has been made under process issued by a law court, unless a deed has been executed and the legal process has been thus fullyexecuted. The reason for this rule is that a law court possesses a summary jurisdiction of an equitable nature for the purpose of preventing its own judgments and processes from being the means of working injustice, and this jurisdiction of the law court exists until the process has been finally executed. See Miller v. Barber, 73 N. J. Law (44 Vr.) 38, 62 Atl. 276; Palladino v. Hilpert, 72 N.J.Eq. (2 Buch.) 270, 65 Atl. 721; Marr v. Marr, 73 N.J.Eq. (3 Buch.) 643, at page 654, 70 Atl. 375, 133 Am. St. Rep. 742. The demurerr to the original bill was accordingly sustained in part for that reason.
The amended bill, like the original bill, fails to disclose whether the sheriff's deed has been delivered. As the sheriff is made a party defendant, the presumption is that the process has not been fully executed and is still subject to the control of the law court out of which it has issued.
I will advise an order sustaining the demurrer.