« FöregåendeFortsätt »
McCue, Packet Company v.
Nock, Philp et al. v.
Packet Company v. McCue,
508 630 460 521
Railroad Company, Bailey v.
United States v.
96 294 445 553 560
78 153 357 657 322 411 532 409 437 354 19
Savings Institution, Oulton v.
109 610 630
82 411 630 596 666 425 398 651 425 648 182 384 125 657 75
The Collector v. Beggs,
!. 182 . 666
The State Harbor Commissioners, Walker v.
PAGB 648 253
United States, Allen v.
207 604 489 168 517 515 405
9 496 601 191 592
67 582 322 75
Valley Railroad, Homestead Company o. .
Walker v. Tbe State Harbor Commissioners,
pany v. Brown,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES,
DECEMBER TERM, 1872, AND OCTOBER TERM, 1873.
CORDOVA v. Hood.
1. Where a deed of land shows on its face that the consideration is yet “to
be paid,” a second purchaser (that is to say, a purchaser from the vendee), who has notice of the deed, takes the land in those States (of which Texas is one) where the English chancery doctrine of a vendor's lien prevails, subject to the vendor's lien, unless such lien has been in
some way waived. 2. In the case of such a deed it is the duty of the new purchaser to inquire;
and where inquiry is a duty, the party bound to make inquiry is affected
with all the knowledge which he would have got had he inquired. 8. Though it is true that taking a note with a surety from the vendee is
generally evidence of an intention to rely exclusively upon the personal security taken, and therefore, presumptively, is an abandonment or waiver of a lien, yet this raises only a presumption, and as a presumption only it may be rebutted by evidence that such was not the intention
of the parties. 4. The testimony of the vendor received to rebut, and being positive, held
sufficient to do so. 6. Where a vendor already has a lien, evidenced by a note for the payment
of all and every part of the purchase-money so long as it remains un. paid, the lien for any purchase-money afterwards still unpaid is not lost by the fact of his receiving part payrnent of the note before its maturity, taking a new note payable at the same time and in the same way and
place as the original note, and a destruction of such original one. 6. By the laws of Texas (which in a matter connected with real estate was
respected by this court in a suit coming from Texas) an assignment of a note given for the purchase-money of real estate carries the vendor's lien.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for the Western District of Texas, on a decree dismissing a bill filed to enforce a vendor's lien. The case was thus: On the 4th of March, 1859, B. G. Shields, by instrument of