1 N.W. 677 (Iowa 1879), Judd v. Anderson

Citation:1 N.W. 677, 51 Iowa 345
Opinion Judge:DAY, J.
Party Name:JUDD v. ANDERSON. GOE v. HETHERINGTON ET AL
Attorney:John F. Lacey and Wm. Kennedy, for appellants. M. E. Cutts, for appellees.
Judge Panel:DAY, J. SEEVERS, J., took no part in the decision of this case.
Case Date:June 09, 1879
Court:Supreme Court of Iowa

Page 677

1 N.W. 677 (Iowa 1879)

51 Iowa 345

JUDD

v.

ANDERSON.

GOE

v.

HETHERINGTON ET AL

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

June 9, 1879

Appeal from Mahaska District Court.

THE above cases are submitted together upon the same abstract. The plaintiff, M. A. Judd, claims of the defendant, Ira W. Anderson, seven hundred dollars on account of an alleged breach of warranty in the sale to the plaintiff of certain land described in the petition. The plaintiff, Bateman H. Goe, claims of the defendant J. E. Hetherington one hundred and fifty dollars and interest on account of certain damages paid by the C., R. I. & P. R. Co. to said Hetherington, for right of way over certain premises described by plaintiff in his petition, and which he claims to own. The defendants Ira W. Anderson and John F. Lacey were substituted in place of James E. Hetherington as defendants. They claim that they are the owners of the land upon which the damages in question were assessed, and that they were such owners at the time of the assessment; that said damages were paid over to them at the time of the assessment, and that plaintiff has no right thereto. All the land in controversy, in both actions, was originally owned by Bateman H. Goe or H. Bateman Goe, which names, it is conceded, refer to the same person. The defendant Ira W. Anderson claims that he acquired title to said land in virtue of a tax sale and deed for the delinquent taxes of 1869 and 1870. The defendant Ira W. Anderson conveyed a part of said land to the plaintiff M. A. Judd, and an undivided one-half to the defendant John F. Lacey.

The real and only question in the two cases is as to the validity of the defendant Anderson's tax title. The court below held that the tax title was invalid, and rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff Judd against the defendant Anderson for five hundred and forty dollars and costs, and in favor of the plaintiff Goe against the defendant Hetherington for one hundred and sixty dollars. The defendants appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.

REVERSED.

John F. Lacey and Wm. Kennedy, for appellants.

M. E. Cutts, for appellees.

DAY, J. SEEVERS, J., took no part in the decision of this case.

OPINION

Page 678

[51 Iowa 346] DAY, J.

At the time of the assessment and sale for delinquent taxes in controversy Bateman H. Goe owned a tract of land...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP