Eldridge v. Robertson
| Decision Date | 20 September 1907 |
| Parties | ELDRIDGE v. ROBERTSON et al. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
A tax deed, which does not show upon its face the amount for which the tract or parcel of land which it purports to convey was sold, is for that reason void.
[Ed Note.-For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 45, Taxation, § 1514.]
While a number of lots sold for taxes to the same individual may be included in one tax deed, the deed must, on its face, show affirmatively that the different lots were sold separately and also the amount for which each lot was sold.
[Ed Note.-For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 45, Taxation §§ 1512, 1513.]
Error from District Court, Logan County; before Justice Jno. H. Burford.
Condemnation proceedings by the Denver, Enid & Gulf Railroad Company against George C. Eldridge and A. D. Adams. W. S. Robertson intervened, claiming the proceeds of certain lots. From the judgment, Eldridge brings error. Reversed and remanded.
See 87 P. 659.
Devereux & Hildreth, for plaintiff in error.
Cotteral & Hornor, Houston & Buckner, and Buckner & Buckner, for defendants in error.
Lots numbered 16, 17, and 18, in block numbered 26, in the city of Guthrie (proper), were, by the town-site board, deeded to George C. Eldridge. These lots were sold on execution issued out of the probate court of Logan county and purchased at the execution sale by one W. S. Robertson. Subsequently, lots 17 and 18, in block 26, referred to above, were sold for taxes, and a tax deed issued therefor to one N. F. Frazier, who conveyed the same by quitclaim deed to one A. D. Adams. The Denver, Enid & Gulf Railroad Company condemned all three of these lots and paid the condemnation money into court. Eldridge and Robertson claimed all of the condemnation money, and Adams claims the condemnation money for lots 17 and 18 through the tax deeds therefor made to Frazier, her grantor. The trial court first tried the issue between Eldridge and Robertson and found in favor of Robertson, and then tried the issues between Adams and the other parties as to lots 17 and 18, and found in favor of Adams; and, as the lots were of equal value, two-thirds of the condemnation money was ordered paid to Adams, and one-third to Robertson. Appeals were prosecuted to this court, and on September 6, 1906, this court, in the case of Eldridge v. Robertson (not officially reported) 87 P. 659, reversed the judgment of the trial court in so far as it decreed the rights of Robertson to be paramount to those of Eldridge. The court held therein that the probate court had no power to decree the sale of real estate on execution. This appeal involves the rights of Adams to the proceeds of lots 17 and 18; the contest in relation thereto being between her and Eldridge. As stated before, Mrs. Adams claims under a tax deed executed by the county treasurer to N. F. Frazier. If this deed is valid, then she is entitled to the condemnation money for lots 17 and 18; otherwise the proceeds should go to Eldridge, the original owner of the lots.
The tax deed to Frazier, under which Mrs. Adams claims, so far as necessary to consider, is in the following language "Whereas, N. F. Frazier, did on the 11th day of October, A. D. 1904, produce to the undersigned, Joseph Stiles, treasurer of the county of Logan, in the territory of Oklahoma, a certificate of purchase in writing bearing date of the 4th day of October, 1892, signed by L. F. Laverty, who at the last mentioned date was treasurer of said county, from which it appears that N. F. Frazier did, on the 4th day of October, 1892, purchase at public auction, at the county treasurer's office in said county, the tract, parcel or lot of land lastly in this indenture described, and which lots were sold to N. F. Frazier for the sum of one hundred eighty-four and 88/100 dollars, being the amount due on the...
To continue reading
Request your trial