Frazier

A purchaser at a Sheriff’s sale may take an assignment of judgments against the defendant in the execution. The payment by Crowell to the Sheriff did not effect a redemption. *401 She did not pay the McCracken judgment. Tile statute concerning redemptions must be strictly followed. (Dickenson, v. Gilliland, 1 Cowen, 498; People v. Coveil, 18 Wend. 593 ; People v. Sheriff of Broome, 19 Wend. 87 ; Waller v. Harris. 20 Wend. 555 ; Ex parte Raymond, 1 Denio, 272 ; Ex parte Peru Iron Company, 7 Cowen, 560.)

Birch & Griffith, for the Respondent.

Who are redemptioners is no longer an open question under the Code. This case is on all fours with and conclusively decided in Sharp v. Miller, 47 Cal. 84 , 85.

The appeal is taken from the judgment; the findings of the Court below are not attacked, and the general question is whether the findings support the judgment which the defendant obtained below. We are of opinion that they do. The ninth finding of fact is in the following words: “Ninth. That said defendant Helena Crowell, alias Golinski, has a good and perfect title to said property.” If it be claimed that this finding, though among the findings of fact, is in its substance a…