Lehman Bros. v. Bradley et al.

Lehman Bros. v. Bradley et al. Bill in Equity to Subject Lands descended to Heirs to Debt of Ancestor. 1. Beir, what not evidence against in proceeding to subject land descended to payment of ancestor’s debt. — There is no such privity between the personal representative and the heir, as renders a judgment against the lormer evidence against the latter, in a proceeding to subject lands descended to them to the payment of a debt of their ancestor. Appeal from Pike Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. H. Austill. This was a bill filed by the appellants, Lehman Brothers, against the appellees, Bhoda C. Bradley et al., and seeks to subject certain land now in possession of the appellees, who are heirs at law of one Craig, or the alienee’s of the heirs, to the payment of a debt due by said Craig, to whom the lands formerly belonged, and who had died intestate without disposing of them. A judgment on this debt had been recovered against the administratrix of said Craig. A transcript of this judgment was the only evidence of the debt offered by the appellants. The Chancellor dismissed the bill, and his decree is now assigned as error. John D. Gardner, for appellants. W. D. Wood, contra. [MAJORITY — BRICKELL, C. J.] BRICKELL, C. J. The bill is filed to subject lands descended to the payment of a debt of the intestate. The only evidence of the indebtedness was the transcript of a judgment against the personal representative. There is no privity between the personal representative and the heir, and a judgment against the former is no evidence against the latter in proceedings to subject lands descended. — Darrington v. Borland, 3 Port. 9; Teague v. Corbitt, 57 Ala. 529. The decree is affirmed.