Lyne v. Jackson

Where a party applies to a court of chancery to prevent the issuing of a patent, or an assignment of a survey, and alledges a fraud committed by the defendant in forging an agreement between him and the complainant, the court of chancery has jurisdiction without the party’s resorting to a caveat in the first instance. During the pendency of such a suit, no person can obtain a patent for the same land under a treasury warrant, located since the institution of the suit 5 but he will be regarded as a purchaser with notice.

These were appeals from the superior court of chancery for the Richmond district. John Lyne filed his bill in the high court of chancery against George Jackson and William Martin,* executors of Hezekiah Davisson deceased, William Haymond and the Register of the Land Office, setting forth the following case: that John Lyne the complainant being possessed of certain treasury warrants, entered into an agreement wish Hezekiah Davisson, by which it was witnessed, 44 that the said John Lyne hath this day delivered the “ said Davisson two land warrants No. 15170 and 15171. “No. 15170 is for eight thousand acres, and No. 15171 is “ for eight thousand, seven hundred and 18-| acres of land. “ The said Davisson for his part doth promise to locate “ and survey the said land for the said John Lyne, and to “ return plots of the surveys to him, the said Lyne, or to “ the register of the iand office. As soon as patents is- “ sue, the said John Lyne do oblige himself, his heirs, to 41 assign to the said Davisson, his heirs &c. one half of all “ such patented land as shall be by him surveyed for the 44 said Lyne, the expense of surveying and patents to be “ equally divided between the said Lyne and Davisson:” which agreement was signed and sealed by both parties : that no adjustment was made between the parties in the life time of the said Hezekiah, whereby to ascertain the part which each was to have of the lands aforesaid, and the complainant did not part with his title in common, in any manner whatsoever, except to that of three thousand acres whereon the warrant No. 15170 was in part laid j yet the said Hezekiah fraudulently wrote or caused to be written an assignment to himself of the whole of that warrant and forged the signature of the complainant thereto; and under colour of that fraud, he caused the land to be surveyed for himself: that the said Hezekiah is since dead, leaving George Jackson and William Martin his executors, who have offered the said land for sale, although no patent hath yet issued for the same. He therefore prays, that the said executors may be injoined from selling the said land and compelled to account with the complainant on the principles of the said agreement, for all warrants by him delivered to their testator: that William Haymond* may he injoined from delivering the said warrant to any person, till the further order of the court; and that the register may be injoined from issuing any patent for the land aforesaid. The injunction was aw arded. William Haymond, by his answer, says, that he believes that the assignment mentioned in the bill, was wholly written by Davisson himself: that the warrant is in his (Haymond’s) hands: that it was delivered to him by the said Davisson for the purpose of being surveyed 5 by virtue of which he hath caused five thousand acres to be surveyed for the said Davisson ; and that he docs not intend to deliver it to any person until the further order of the court. The executors say in their answers, that they know nothing of the alledged fraud : that they have never of-^ere(^ any of the said lands for sale : that the complainant has himself been in default, 1st because they believe that their testator has borne all the expense of the locations and surveys, and the complainant has never refunded his proportion of the same, and Sridly because the complainant has not conveyed a moiety of the said lands to their testator. They therefore hope, that the complainant may be compelled to make such division and to execute conveyances accordingly, and account for his proportion of the expenses of the locations and surveys in execution of the said articles of agreement. Upon the death of John Lyne, the suit was revived in the names of William Lyne his executor, and the said William Lyne and William Lyne, jr. his devisees ; and upon the death of the latter, it was revived by his executors and devisees. Depositions were taken, which clearly prove that the ^assignment in question was wholly written by Hezekiah Davisson, and establish all the material allegations of the bill. The same complainants afterwards filed a supplemental bill against Benjamin Wilson jr., Daniel Davisson and the Register, charging, that pending the suit against Davisson’s representatives, the said Wilson had procured a warrant for five thousand acres, which he had laid on the land in controversy, and having had a plat and certificate of survey returned to the Register’s office, will obtain a patent for the same, unless prevented by the interposition of a court of chancery : that the complainants were ignorant of this fraudulent attempt until informed of it by a letter received by the last mail: that the first survey being in the name of Hezekiah Davisson by virtue of the forged assignment aforesaid, and all the subsequent proceedings being in the name of the said Hezekiah, the complainants cannot resort to the remedy by caveat against a grant to the said Benjamin Wilson, with any hope of success. They therefore pray, that the register of the land office may be injoincd from issuing a patent to the said Benjamin, on the said plat and certificate of Survey, &c. The court granted the injunction. The defendants Wilson and Davisson admit, that the defendant Wilson did enter and locate a warrant for 5000 acres, and the same was surveyed on the 10th of September 1815, on a certain tract of land in Harrison county, containing 4710 acres j a part of which survey is included in Lyne’s survey, assigned to Davisson : that the defendants do not admit that the said assignment was forged or unauthorized, and require proof thereof if the same should become material in this cause 5 they then urge several legal objections to the objects and proceedings of this suit. The chancellor decreed, that the said suits be dismissed, the complainants having a remedy at law by caveat. The plaintiffs appealed to this court.