Wilkins v. Willson
Before: Wallace
Synopsis
Redemption op Land pbom Shbbifp’s Sabe.—If the judgment debtor whose land has been sold on the judgment dejiosits with the sheriff, before the time for redemption expires, money sufficient to redeem it from the sale, and the sheriff, after the time for redemption expires, executes and delivers to the purchaser a deed, the judgment debtor, if he would claim the benefit of the redemption, must not withdraw the money from the sheriff, for by withdrawing the money he ratifies the act of the sheriff in delivering the deed.
By the Court, Wallace, C. J.: Conceding that the deposit of the redemption-money in the hands of the sheriff by Wade defeated the authority of the sheriff to deliver the deed to Wilson, Wade’s subsequent withdrawal of the redemption-money operated as to Wade, and as to the appellant, claiming through him by subsequent conveyance, to restore the necessary authority to the sheriff, and to ratify the precedent delivery of the deed by the latter. In delivering the deed, the sheriff acted as the agent of Wade, the execution defendant, and a present want of authority might, as in other cases, be supplied by the subsequent ratification of the principal. Wade, or his grantee, cannot, in view of the subsequent withdrawal of the redemption-money (even though accompanying it with the protest which he made), come now to say that the sheriff had not the requisite authority to deliver the deed, and by this means not only appropriate the redemption-money but retain the land also.
Judgment and order affirmed.
Mr. Justice Rhodes did not express an opinion*
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)