Glos v. Cessna

• Decision Date: 16 December 1903
• Citation: 69 N.E. 634,207 Ill. 69
• Parties: GLOS v. CESSNA.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

207 Ill. 69

69 N.E. 634

GLOS

v.CESSNA. ^*

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 16, 1903.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County; E. F. Dunne, Judge.

Application by Sarah Louise Cessna against Jacob Glos for the registration of title to certain land. From a decree in favor of applicant, defendant appeals. Reversed.

Jacob Glos (John R. O'Connor, of counsel), pro se.

T. F. Monahan and Wm. S. Newburger, for appellee.

CARTWRIGHT, J.

On December 6, 1902, appellee, Sarah Louise Cessna, filed in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of Cook county her application to the court to register her title to a lot in Chicago pursuant to an act concerning land titles in force May 1, 1897. The application stated that her estate in the lot was in fee simple, subject to a certain trust deed; that no other person claimed any interest in the lot, except appellant, Jacob Glos, and Emma J. Glos, whose claim was an alleged tax deed; and that the premises were unoccupied, which latter averment the court afterward allowed to be amended so as to show that she was in possession. She prayed the court to find and declare her title or interest in the lot, to decree the same, and order the registrar of titles to register the same, and to grant such other and further relief as should be according to equity. The appellant, Jacob Glos, and Emma J. Glos, appeared and answered. The answer of appellant stated that he was not informed as to the title of the applicant, and alleged that the lot was delinquent for the general taxes of 1896; that judgment was entered against it; that he purchased it at a tax sale; and, after setting out the various steps to entitle him to a tax deed, averred that such deed was delivered to him and recorded, and that he paid subsequent taxes on the lot, and had title in fee simple thereto. The application was referred to the examiner of titles, who proceeded to hear the evidence and prepared his report, finding that the applicant was the owner in fee simple of the lot; that it was not occupied, but was in the possession of the applicant; and that the tax deed of appellant, and a quitclaim deed from him to Emma J. Glos, were void and of no effect. Appellant objected to the findings, and, his objections being overruled, they were allowed to stand as exceptions in the circuit court. The exceptions were overruled by the court, the report was approved, and a decree was entered finding the applicant to be the owner in fee simple of the lot, subject to said trust deed, and that the tax deed was void, and confirming title in the applicant in fee simple upon payment to the appellant and Emma J. Glos of the amount due them for taxes, costs, and interest.

On the hearing before the examiner the applicant offered in evidence an abstract of title, and also a book of abstracts, both of which were objected to by appellant. According to the report of the examiner, he stated, in reply to the objections, that the abstract was good for the purpose of satisfying him as to the applicant's title, but not as proof of title against the objection of appellant, and that the book of abstracts was the property of the recorder of deeds, and the reference was made to him as examiner in...