Summary

Henry Baldwin Lessee of Grignon v. Astor — Opinion of the Court

Time has consecrated them; the courts of the states have followed, and this court has never departed from them. They are rules of property, on which the repose of the country depends; titles acquired under the proceedings of courts of competent jurisdiction must be deemed inviolable in collateral action, or none can know what is his own; and there are no judicial sales around which greater sanctity ought to be placed, than those made of the estates of decedents, by order of those courts to whom the laws of the states confide full jurisdiction over the subjects.
Source: Wikisource

Henry Baldwin Lessee of Grignon v. Astor — Opinion of the Court

The granting the license to sell is an adjudication upon all the facts necessary to give jurisdiction, and whether they existed or not is wholly immaterial, if no appeal is taken; the rule is the same whether the law gives an appeal or not; if none is given from the final decree, it is conclusive on all whom it concerns. The record is absolute verity, to contradict which there can be no averment or evidence; the court having power to make the decree, it can be impeached only by fraud in the party who obtains it. 6 Pet., 729. A purchaser under it is bound to look beyond the decree
Source: Wikisource

Henry Baldwin Lessee of Grignon v. Astor — Opinion of the Court

A substantial compliance is all which is at any time necessary in carrying out a sale by order of a court.
7. The plaintiff did not attempt by any evidence directly to impeach the proceedings, by showing want of notice, want of evidence, want of strict conformity to law, although Paul Grignon, the administrator, and Augustine Grignon, the purchaser, had both united to defeat the sale under the order by a subsequent conveyance, and were both produced as witnesses for the plaintiff.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature