Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/341

 M'wILLUMS V. WITHINGTON. 329 misiakcn description, of which land the debtor, Bouse, T^'as, and for a long time had beea, in possession, it was held that the purchaser had an equity which could be enforced by proper proeeedings, and that, whenever a party is in such a situation as to be entitled to call for a specifie performance, he then has such an interest as may be transferred by execu- tion sale. "And as a matter of course," says the court, "when the law once annexes to the debtor's interest in land the incident of transferability, it must manifestly follow that the puroliaser will immediately succeed to and occupy the statua of him whose estate the slieriff's deed purports to convey ; otherwise the statute respecting execution sales would be utterly inoperative, so far as regards equitable interest in land." Morgan v. Bouse, 53 Mo. 219. In Hodges v. Saunders, 17 Pick. 470, it was held that the benefit of an agreement, made by the defendant in the nature of a covenant for further assurance, passed with the estate to the purchaser. The sale was an officiai sale by an administrator for the payment of debts, and the estate passed solely by force of the statute, and not by reason of any interest the grantor [administrator] personally had in it. An assignee under a sherifi's sale is the assignee of the original party, — as much so as if the latter had assigned to him directly. McCrady v. Brishane, 1 N. & M. 104; Red- mine v. Brown, 10 Ga. 311. In White v. Whitney, 3 Met. 81, it was held that the pur- chaser at sheriff's sale of the equity of redemption of a mort- gaged estate buys the whole estate, subject to the mortgage, and a covenant that the premises are free from encum- brances passes to him. For the breach of this covenant h& may have an action. " It was," says the court, "a covenant incident to the estate made for its security and protection, benelicial to the person to whom the estate should corne, but to no other. It was part of the debtor's right, title, and interest in the premises." The legal effect and operation of the sheriff's deed was tO' transfer this covenant to the purchaser. When the covenant runs with the land it is immaterial whether it pass by deed from the grantee or by a sheriff's deed. The grantee iri the^