Flood v Sutton

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 05 February 1841
• Date: 05 February 1841
• Court: Rolls Court (Ireland)

Rolls.

FLOOD

and

SUTTON.

Powys v. MansfieldENR 6 Sim. 637.

Price v. Carver 3 Myl. & Cr. 157.

340 CASES IN EQUITY. rights decreed ; yet it was necessary to bring the judgment creditors before the Court by supplemental bill, in order to have the creditors bound by the decree'. In Ponsonby v. Ponsonby (a), the late Master of the Rolls decided that a purchaser is entitled to have all encumbrances prior to the rights decreed satisfied upon record. The MASTER OF THE ROLLS said he would read the report, and the charges filed by Quin and Bunbury, and the discharges thereto. MASTER OF THE ROLLS. I have read the papers in this case, and have made the order for alloÂcation of the purchase-money. The first three judgments mentioned on this motion, and which are to be paid off under the present order, must be first satisfied upon record. I cannot allow the purchaser's objection as to the fourth and fifth judgments now vested in the representatives of William Quin, and in respect of which Quin filed a charge under the decree to account in this cause ; as by so doing he bound himself and his representatives by the decree confirming the Master's report, which did not find any thing to be due upon those judgments. If his represenÂtatives should hereafter proceed against the lands, the purchaser would be amply secured by the proceedings in this cause, which should entitle him to whatever costs he might be put to by his defence. As to Bunbury's judgment, the Master's report, finding that nothing is due upon it, has been made up and is now confirmed: I could not otherwise have made the order for payment of the purchase-money ; as Bunbury did not go into the Master's office until after the final decree, and the purchaser should have been entitled to have either the Master's report under the order of reference confirmed, or satisfaction entered upon the judgment, or the lands released from it. But it appears that the plaintiff is ready to furnish to the purchaser attested copies of the charge and discharge, and of the Master's report. (a) 2 Hog. 204. FLOOD v. SUTTON. Feb. 5. Under the 1 W. Tins was a motion on behalf of the plaintiff, that the Master might be at 4, c. 47, s. 11, an infant de- liberty to execute the conveyance to the several purchasers of the lands fendant enti tled to the equity of redemption of lands decreed to be sold in a foreclosure suit, ordered to execute the conveyance to a purchaser under the decree, although the decree gave to the infant a day to shew cause against it, upon his coming of age. Whether the decree should have given the infant a day to shew cause-:--qucere. CASES IN EQUITY. 341 sold under the decree in this cause, in the name of the infant defendant William Sutton. The bill was filed to foreclose a mortgage and for a sale, against Thomas Sutton, as heir and personal representative of Patrick Sutton the mortgagor. On the '7th of May 1832, the plaintiff obtained a decree directing accounts of...