Clark v. Hibbler
| Decision Date | 05 July 1915 |
| Docket Number | 16949 |
| Citation | 109 Miss. 432,69 So. 220 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | CLARK v. HIBBLER |
APPEAL from the chancery court of Jackson county. HON. J. M STEVENS, Chancellor.
Suit by T. G. Hibbler against W. R. Clark. From a decree overruling a demurrer to the bill of complaint, defendant appeals.
The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.
Judgment reversed, and bill dismissed.
W. D Bullard, for appellant.
The question involved in this appeal is the validity of the action of the board of supervisors of Jackson county at the April Term, 1912, in ordering the sheriff of Jackson county to make "valid" deed to complainant and the validity of the deed made by the sheriff in persuance of said order on April 16, 1912.
The complainant admits that the deed made by the tax collector at the tax sale is invalid, or that the errors in the deed invalidated it, and he is standing on the order of the board of supervisors and the sheriff's deed made in compliance therewith.
Under section 2771, Code 1906, the board of supervisors had no authority to order the sheriff to make complainant a deed to the land which he claims in this suit, and the order made by the board is void, and the deed made by the sheriff in compliance with said order is also void. Neither section 2771 nor any other law authorizes such a procedure. The law relied on by complainant and quoted by him in his bill and amended bill applies only where no deed was originally made, that is "in case any tax collector should fail to make a conveyance of any land sold by him for taxes of any kind during his continuance in office," then the board of supervisors may order his successor to make the deed that was never made before. If the board of supervisors could order the sheriff to make a deed correcting the dates in a void tax deed, then the same board could order the sheriff to make a "valid" deed and change the description of the land from the southwest quarter to the northwest quarter, and correct all the defects in tax deeds. Such a procedure would vest the board of supervisors with more power than the supreme court has.
The board of supervisors can do valid acts only as empowered by law, Howe v. State, 53 Miss. 57; Board Sup Monroe Co. v. Strong, 78 Miss. 565. The powers and jurisdiction of boards of supervisors are special and limited, and must be executed strictly according to the statute conferring them: Ballard v. Davis, 31 Miss. 525. In this case three levee commissioners were empowered to locate a levee and report to the board of supervisors, only two commissioners, acted in making the location, the third discussed the matter with the two and acquiesced in the report. The court held the action void for the reason the law was not strictly complied with.
In Jefferson County v. Grafton, 74 Miss. 435, 21 So. 247, the supreme court held that the course of judicial decisions of this state holds boards of supervisors to the strict limitations of their powers. The court cites the case of West Carroll Parish v. Gaddis, 31 La. Ann. 928, and adopts the language of the Louisiana court, saying that the board has no life, no attribute, no power, no right, no obligation, but such as have been conferred or imposed on them.
There is a long line of decisions in Mississippi and in other states, as well as text authority, to the same tenor as the decisions on so clear a principle of law.
T. G. Hibbler, for appellee.
Appellee submits that he was entitled under the law to a deed which would convey a valid title to him, as all conditions subsequent and precedent to a valid sale had been complied with, except the receipt of a valid deed therefor, and instead of a valid deed he received a void instrument, a nullity, nothing, and that he was entitled to a deed therefor under section 271, of the Mississippi Code of 1906.
Judge CALHOUN in the case of Pattison v. Harvey, 81 Miss 348, 33 So....
To continue reading
Request your trial