alone to the levy, without the aid of extrinsic evidence. Robertson v. Hoge, 83 Va. 124 (1 S. E. Rep. 667); Brown v. Dickson, 2 Hump. 395 (37 Am. Dec. 560); Waters v. Duval, 11 Gill & J. 37 (33 Am. Dec. 693)." Sec. 318. Notice of sale. Under Rhode Island Judiciary Act, ch. 37, § 11, requiring a notice of levy on land to be given for three months "after" such levy, and "before" the sale, it is held that a sale on Dec. 5th of land levied on Sept. 5th is void. Goldsworthy v. Coyle, 19 R. I. 323 (33 Atl. Rep. 466). North Carolina Code, § 456, 457, appliednotice of sale. Shaffer v. Bledsoe, 118 N. C. 279 (23 S. E. Rep. 1000). Ill. Rev. Stat., ch. 77, § 14, construed-publication of notice in newspaper. Pentzel v. Squire, 161 III. 346 143 N. E. Rep. 1064; 52 Am. St. Rep. 373). Sec. 319. Sales in parcels or in solido. Where land is in detached, independent parcels, each of considerable value, it should be sold in parcels. Lundy v. Seymour, 55 N. J. Eq. 1 (35 Atl. Rep. 893). Where real estate is capable of subdivision and an execution can be satisfied by a sale of a part thereof it is the duty of the officer to sell in parcels, but he will not be required to sell fractional undivided interests in realty, the entire title to which is in the execution defendant. Willbanks v. Untriner, 98 Ga. 801 (25 S. E. Rep. 841). Sec. 320. Certificate of purchase-Sheriff's deed. A certificate of sheriff's sale of real estate confers no title, but is evidence only of a lien. Vandevender v. Moore, 146 Ind. 44 (44 N. E. Rep. 3). Under Ill. Rev. Stat., ch. 77, § 30, unless the holder of a certificate of purchase take out his deed within five years from the expiration of the time of redemption the certificate of purchase becomes null and void and he loses all interest in the property. Brown v. Ridenhower, 161 Ill. 239 (43 N. E. Rep. 976). A sheriff's deed relates back and takes effect as of the date of sale; and a sheriff who succeeds himself may execute a deed for land sold on execution during his first term. Wilson v. Spear, 68 Vt. 145 (34 Atl. Rep. 429). A deed by an officer executed in pursuance of a sale, from which the proper steps to redeem have been Phillips v. Hagart, 113 Cal. 552 (45 already taken, is void. Sec. 321. Sale under junior judgment-Right to proceeds-Purchaser's title. Where a sheriff sells under a junior judgment and at the time of the sale has no execution in his hands issued upon older judgments, the purchaser takes the title of the execution defendant subject to the liens of the older judgments, Dysart v. Branderth, 118 N. C. 968 (23 S. E. Rep. 966); Bernhart v. Brown, 118 N. C. 700 (24 S. E. Rep. 527; 36 L. R. A. 402); and the holder of such senior judgment has no claim upon the proceeds of such sale. Caldwell v. Houser, 108 Ala. 125 (19 So. Rep. 796). But if the executions on the senior judgments are in the officer's hands at the time of the sale, the purchaser gets a full title, and the liens of the senior judgments are transferred to the proceeds of the sale. Such a purchaser may collaterally attack a previous sale because the judgment on which it was had was void for the want of service of process. Bernhardt v. Brown, 118 N. C. 700 (24 S. E. Rep. 527; 36 L. R. A. 402). Applying S. C. Rev. Stats., § 744, providing that the sheriff "shall pay over the proceeds of any real estate sold by him to any judgment having prior lien thereon," it is held that a sheriff making a sale of land under an execution issued from a state court may be required, upon proper application, to pay the proceeds arising therefrom to the holder of a federal judgment which was a prior lien on the land. In re Voorhies, 46 S. C. 114 (24 S. E. Rep. 170). Sec. 322. Title, rights and liabilities of purchaser. The execution creditor may make a valid purchase without paying the amount of the principal debt to the sheriff, where, in lieu thereof, he receipts to the sheriff for that amount, and where there is no question of his first right to the fund otherwise paid to the sheriff. Boots v. Ristine, 146 Ind. 75 (44 N. E. Rep. 15). One who purchases at an execution sale homestead property sold for a debt for which it is not liable acquires no title. Cal. Civ. Code, § 1265, applied. City Store v. Cofer, 111 Cal. 482 (44 Pac. Rep. 168). Title acquired under an execution sale will not relate back further than the time the lien was acquired under the judgment upon which it is based unless the record of the proceeding clearly shows that the sale was made under a lien acquired prior to that time. Pennsylvania Mortg. Inv. Co. v. Gilbert, 13 Wash. St. 684 (43 Pac. Rep. 941). In determining priority of liens upon the property sold under execution the purchaser thereof is not bound to look beyond the record. Hilliard v. Tustin, 172 Pa. 354 (33 Atl. Rep. 574). Where, after the rendition of a judgment against the owner of land he rents the same to another who plants a crop thereon, one who purchases the land at an execution sale made in pursuance of a levy subsequently made thereon acquires only the rights of the original land owner in the growing crops. Dollar v. Roddenbery, 97 Ga. 148 (25 S. E. Rep. 410). Under Wash. Code of Proc., § 519, a purchaser at an execution sale is entitled to the use and occupation of the premises during the period allowed for redemption or the "rents or value of the use and occupation" where the premises are held by a tenant under an unexpired lease. His right to these is absolute and he cannot be made to account for them upon redemption. Knipe v. Austin, 13 Wash. St. 189 (43 Pac. Rep. 25). For dissenting opinion, see 44 Pac. Rep. 531. A purchaser's liability for the amount of his bid is a personal one to the officer and he may enforce it in his own name even after the termination of his official character. Trustees', Ex'rs' & Secur's' Ins. Corp. v. Bowling, 2 Kan. App. 770 (44 Pac. Rep. 42). Applying Ia. Code, § 3089, it is held that a purchaser who fails to comply with his bid cannot complain if the officer treats the sale as a nullity and accepts payment of the amount due from the judgment debtor. Long v. Valleau, 97 Ia. 328 (66 N. W. Rep. 195). Mill. & V. Tenn. Code, § 2950, applied-right of purchasing judgment creditor to advance bid, and effect thereof. Rogers v. Rogers, Tenn. (35 S. W. Rep. 890). Under Miss. Code 1892, § 4461, it is held that a purchaser at an execution sale may maintain an action of forcible entry and detainer against a tenant of the defendant in execution, who withholds possession after the expiration of his rights. Glenn v. Caldwell, 74 Miss. 49 (20 So. Rep. 152). Ga. Code, § 3651, applied-summary eviction by purchaser at execution sale. Smith v. Equitable Mortg. Co., 98 Ga. 240 (25 S. E. Rep. 423). An action by a purchaser for possession cannot be defeated by an attack upon the sufficiency of the appraisement where it appears regular upon its face. Gudger v. Penland, 118 N. C. 832 (23 S. E. Rep. 921). Sec. 323. Purchaser's rights upon failure of title. Construing Mont. Code Civ. Proc., § 347, which provides that "if the purchaser of real property sold on execution, or his successor in interest, be evicted therefrom in consequence of irregularities in the proceedings concerning the sale, or of the reversal or discharge of the judgment, he may recover the price paid, with interest, from the judgment creditor," it is held that a purchaser at an execution sale is evicted within the meaning of this statute so as to be entitled to recover from the judgment creditor the price paid, where, in a suit by the latter, the judgment, execution and sale thereunder have been adjudged void. Elling v. Harrington, 17 Mont. 322 (42 Pac. Rep. 851). A purchaser who seeks reimbursement upon the setting aside of the sale must account for the rents and profits of the land while in his possession. House v. Robertson, 89 Tex. 681 (36 S. W. Rep. 251). Sec. 324. Validity of sales-Setting aside. An execution sale of land to which the execution debtor has no title is void. McCord v. McGinty, 99 Ga. 307 (25 S. E. Rep. 667). A sale under a dormant judgment is voidable only and cannot be assailed collaterally. Link v. Connell, 48 Neb. 574 (67 N. W. Rep. 475), following Gillespie v. Switzer, 43 Neb. 772 (62 N. W. Rep. 228; see Vol. IV, § 303). Mere inadequacy of price, without more, is not sufficient ground for setting aside an execution sale. Felton v. Felton, 175 Pa. 44 (34 Atl. Rep. 312); Fullerton v. Sciper, Eq. (34 Atl. Rep. 680). The failure of the officer to set aside to the judgment debtor his homestead, as required by statute (Ill. Rev. Stat., ch. 52, §§ 1, 10), coupled with inadequacy of price, will be sufficient ground for setting aside an execution sale. Bach v. May, 163 Ill. 547 (45 N. E. Rep. 248). Where a judgment against more than one defendant is N. J. joint and several a sale of the land of one of the defendants thereunder on an execution issued against a deceased defendant together with the other defendants is not void. Christ v. Flannigan, 23 Colo. 140 (46 Pac. Rep. 683). The fact that a judgment creditor who became the purchaser of his debtor's property at an execution sale thereof had bought the judgments of some of the other creditors, under an agreement with them not to bid at the sale, will not invalidate the sale as to other creditors, such purchaser having contemplated or committed no actual fraud. Woodruff v. Harrington, 175 Pa. 302 (34 Atl. Rep. 667). The holders of judgment liens have such an interest in the property of their judgment debtor that they can maintain an action to set aside a fraudulent execution sale thereof by the judgment creditors of his immediate grantor. Tigue v. Banta, 176 Pa. St. 414 (35 Atl. Rep. 131). Sec. 325. Miscellaneous notes. An execution creditor must exhaust all of his legal remedies before a court of equity will assist him in getting at his debtor's property. Stanton v. Catron, 8 N. M. 355 (45 Pac. Rep. 884). A collateral attack can no more be made upon an erroneous execution or order of sale than upon an erroneous judgment. Rowe v. Black et al, 112 Cal. 637 (44 Pac. Rep. 1084). In Alabama it is held that an injunction will not lie to prevent the collection of executions issued on decrees void on their face. Martin v. Atkinson, 108 Ala. 314 (18 So. Rep. 888). S. C. Rev. Stats., § 2121, applied-compliance with bidpayment in cash-resale. Brown v. Barnwell Mfg. Co., 46 S. C. 415 (24 S. E. Rep. 191). Sayles' Tex. Civ. Stat., Art. 2880, applied-injunction to stay proceedings on execution— jurisdiction. Leachman v. Capps, 89 Tex. 690 (36 S. W. Rep. 250). |