
    Latimer vs. Tumlin et al.
    
    H. sold a tract of land to L., gave bond for titles, and received part of the purchase money. Subsequently L. having ascertained that there were old judgments against his vendor, he caused the sale to himself to be rescinded, and obtained a decree against Ii. for the money paid, which was to operate against the land as a lien; he also retained possession of the land. Prior to the date of this decree, a judgment had been obtained against H.; on this &fi. fa. was issued and levied on the land, which was sold at sheriff’s sale. The purchaser ruled the sheriff to require the latter to put him in possession. L. resisted the rule :
    
      Held, that the rule was properly made absolute, requiring the sheriff to place the purchaser in possession. L. held under the defendant in fi. fa., and his decree gave him no right to hold possession of the land against the purchaser under a prior judgment.
    Judgment affirmed.
    March 10, 1885.
   Blandeord, Justice.  