Berthold v. Hoskins

• Decision Date: 27 May 1889
• Parties: BERTHOLD et al. v. HOSKINS et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Mississippi

38 F. 772

BERTHOLD et al. v. HOSKINS et al.

United States Circuit Court, S.D. Mississippi, Eastern Division.

May 27, 1889

Nugent & McWillie, for complainants.

Hiram Cassidy, for defendants.

HILL J.

This cause is submitted upon bill, answers, and proof, from which the following facts appear: On the 5th day of February, 1887 said I. W. Hoskins and wife executed a mortgage upon the real estate described in the bill, which then belonged to said I W. Hoskins, to secure the payment of three notes executed by him to complainants. After maturity of the notes complainants, in the chancery court of Lincoln county, filed their bill against said Hoskins and wife to foreclose the mortgage, for the payment of the amount due on the mortgage notes, which resulted in their obtaining a decree from said chancery court of Lincoln county for foreclosure and a sale of said real estate. The property was purchased by complainants, and, by confirmation of the sale and deed of the commissioner on the 31st day of December, 1887, the title to the estate so sold and purchased was vested in complainants. At some time after the date of the mortgage and before t e sale of the real estate,-- the precise date does not appear,-- this real estate was assessed for state and county taxes at the sum of $2,000, in the name of Mrs Ella B. Hoskins, wife of I. W. Hoskins. On the 4th day of January, 1886, the board of mayor and aldermen of the city of Brookhaven, in which the property is situate, levied a tax upon the same of 3 1/2 mills on the $100 worth for city purposes, and 3 mills for school purposes. This tax was levied for the year 1885. On the 3d day of May, 1886, the tax not being paid, the property was offered for sale for the taxes due, and, no one bidding, the same was struck off to the board of mayor and aldermen of the city of Brookhaven, and a deed was executed by the tax collector to the board of mayor and aldermen, conveying the property to them; which deed, it is claimed, was left with the mayor, but was not acknowledged or marked 'Filed' until the 10th day of June thereafter. The charter of the city required that in making sales for taxes the same notice should be given as was required of the collection of state and county taxes, which was three weeks' notice published in some newspaper published in the county. The proof shows that the notice of sale was published in a newspaper published in the city of Brookhaven,-- First, on the 15th April; second, on the 22d April; and, lastly, on the 29th of April, 1886,-- the first being only 18 days before the day of sale. On the 11th day of November, 1887, complainants, by their agent and attorney, offered to redeem the property so sold and purchased for the taxes due by paying the same, with interest and damages thereon, which was refused by the mayor, but who on the 26th day of December, 1887, sold and conveyed the same property to Mrs. Elizabeth Hoskins, the mother of I. W. Hoskins, for the sum of $41.85. This bill is filed for the purpose of having the deed by the tax collector to the board of mayor and aldermen of Brookhaven, and by the board of mayor and aldermen to Mrs. Elizabeth or Mrs. Lizzie A. Hoskins, declared void, and set aside as a cloud upon complainants' title to the town lots and real estate described in the bill, and upon the following grounds: (1) That, under the charter of the city of Brookhaven, complainants were entitled to redeem said real estate at any time within 18 months after the sale of said property, and the deposit of the deed with the mayor of said city, and that the offer was made to redeem within 18 months after the deed was properly acknowledged and filed with said mayor; (2) that the 18 months allowed for redemption had not expired when the sale was made by the mayor to Mrs. Elizabeth Hoskins; (3) that by the...