Dixon v. Bowlegs

Decision Date23 October 1923
Docket NumberCase Number: 11838
CitationDixon v. Bowlegs, 93 Okla. 47, 219 P. 665, 1923 OK 815 (Okla. 1923)
PartiesDIXON v. BOWLEGS.
CourtOklahoma Supreme Court
Syllabus

¶0 1.Taxation--Tax Deed---Invalidity--Judgment on Pleadings.

A tax deed describing two or more tracts or parcels of land, to be valid upon its face, must show affirmatively that the different tracts or parcels were sold separately and the amount for which each tract was sold, and failure in this renders the deed void upon its face.(1) Where the petition in an action of ejectment bases right of recovery upon a void tax deed, and the defendant answers by general denial, and plaintiff files motion for judgment ca the pleadings, the court is warranted in rendering judgment on said motion in favor of the defendant.

2.Same--Release of Lands from Erroneous Assessments--Effect.

The order of county commissioners issuing certificate of error under section 9648,Compiled Stats. 1921, releasing lands from erroneous assessment, is in the nature of a judgment, and binding upon all parties interested in the title before valid tax deed is issued.

John W. Willmott and R. J. Roberts, for plaintiff in error.

J. A. Baker and P. T. McVay, for defendant in error.

THREADGILL, C.

¶1 This appeal comes up from the district court of Seminole county.The plaintiff in error, on February 2, 1918, filed suit in ejectment in said district court against the defendant in error asking for possession of the S. 1/2 of S.W. 1/4 of N.E. 1/4 of S.W. 1/4 and S.E. 1/4 of S.W. 1/4, less 7.07 acres for Wewoka townsite, in section 18, E., T. 8 N., R. 8 E., in Seminole county, and for rents and damages.She claimed title through a tax deed executed to her by the county treasurer of Seminole county on November 28, 1917, a copy of which deed was attached to the petition and is as follows:

"Whereas, Ora M. Dixon on the 28th day of November, A.D. 1917, did produce to the undersigned, G. E. Bean, treasurer of the county of Seminole, state of Oklahoma, a certificate of purchase, in writing, bearing the date of the 4th day of November, 1915, signed by Frank R. Noe, who at the last mentioned date was treasurer of said county, from which it appears that on said 4th day of November, 1915, the tract, parcel or lot of land lastly in this indenture described was offered for sale at public auction, at the office of said county treasurer at the court house in said county, for the taxes levied thereon for the year 1914, and that there being no other bidder there for offering the amount due, the same was by said county treasurer bid off in the name of said county for the sum of $ 18.42, the said sum being the amount of taxes, penalty, interest and costs due and unpaid on said land returned delinquent for nonpayment of taxes, costs and charges for the said year 1911, to wit: Taxes $15.68 Adv. 25 Treas. Fees .25 Clerks Fees .50, Pub. $ 8.00 Penalty $ 1.49 Sheriff Fees $ 2.75 in the county of Seminole and state of Oklahoma, and that thereafter, to wit, on the 23rd day of November, 1915, one Ora M. Dixon did pay to said county treasurer the sum of $ 20.10 being the full amount of taxes, penalty, interest and costs of sale and transfer up to the date of said payment, and that thereupon the said treasurer did assign and deliver to said purchaser, Ora M. Dixon, the said certificate of purchase held by said county for said real estate; and it further appearing from an assignment endorsed on said certificate that said Seminole Co. did, on the 23 day of November, 1915, for a good and valuable consideration, sell, assign, transfer and set over to said Ora M. Dixon all of his right, title and interest in and to said certificate, and all rights thereunder, which said, assignment was duly acknowledged before a notary public in and for ; and it further appearing that said Ora M Dixon is the legal owner of said certificate of purchase and the time fixed by law for redeeming the land therein described having now expired, and the same not having been redeemed as provided by law, and the said Ora M. Dixon, having demanded a deed for the tracts of land mentioned in said certificate, which was the least quantity of the tracts above described that would sell for the amount due thereon for taxes, costs and charges, as above specified, and it appearing that said lands were legally liable for taxation and had been duly assessed and properly charged on the tax books, or duplicate, for the year 1914, and that said lands had been legally advertised for sale for said taxes, and were sold on the 4th day of November, 1915, and it further appearing that the subsequent taxes on said lands for the year 1915 and 1916 amounting at the date of indorsement to $ 16.66, 31.73 were paid by the said Ora M. Dixon, as provided by law, and the amount thereof indorsed on said certificate on the 11th day of July, 1917.
"Now, Therefore, This Indenture, made this 28th day of November, 1917, between the state of Oklahoma, by S.E. Bean, treasurer of said county of Seminole, of the first part, and the said Ora M. Dixon, of Wewoka, Oklahoma, of the second part.
"Witnesseth: That the said party of the first part, for and in consideration of the premises and the sum of one dollar ($ 1.00) in hand paid, hath granted, bargained and sold, and by these presents doth grant, bargain, sell and convey to the said party of the second part, his heirs, and assigns forever, the said tract or parcel of land mentioned in said certificate, and described as follows, to wit: S. 1/2 of S.W. 1/4 of N.E.
...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
7 cases
  • Westerheide v. Wilcox
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • March 31, 1942
    ...assessed, taxed, and sold for delinquent taxes as a single tract. ¶21 Turman v. Ingram, 83 Okla. 198, 202 P. 993, and Dixon v. Bowlegs, 93 Okla. 47, 219 P. 665, are cases cited and relied upon by plaintiffs. The deed involved in Turman v. Ingram, supra, showed upon its face that three separ......
  • Patteson v. Myers
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • November 1, 1938
    ...Okla. 165, 92 P. 156; Kramer v. Smith (1909) 23 Okla. 381, 100 P. 532; Turman v. Ingram (1921) 83 Okla. 198, 202 P. 993; Dixon v. Bowlegs (1923) 93 Okla. 47, 219 P. 665; Cochran v. Sullivan, supra; Price v. Mahoney (1935) 175 Okla. 355, 53 P.2d 257; Cooley on Taxation (4th Ed.) secs. 1478, ......
  • Sires v. Parriott
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • January 20, 1925
    ...29, 157 P. 740; Blanchard v. Reed et al., 67 Okla. 137, 168 P. 664; Turman et al. v. Ingram, 83 Okla. 198, 202 P. 993; Dixon v. Bowlegs, 93 Okla. 47, 219 P. 665; Cochran v. Sullivan, 94 Okla. 23, 220 P. 870; Clewell v. Cottle, 99 Okla. 84, 225 P. 946. ¶14 It is equally well established by t......
  • Felt v. Schaub
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • December 18, 1928
    ...Merkle, 6 Okla. 714, 52 P. 929; Eldridge v. Robertson, 19 Okla. 165, 92 P. 156; Turman v. Ingram, 83 Okla. 198, 202 P. 993; Dixon v. Bowlegs, 93 Okla. 47, 219 P. 665; Cochran v. Sullivan, 94 Okla. 23, 220 P. 870; Sires v. Parriott, 106 Okla. 244, 233 P. 748; Simpson v. Reinman (Ark.) 227 S.......
  • Get Started for Free