Gossett v. Fordyce Lumber Co.
| Decision Date | 26 May 1930 |
| Docket Number | 12 |
| Citation | 28 S.W.2d 57,181 Ark. 848 |
| Parties | GOSSETT v. FORDYCE LUMBER COMPANY |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Dallas Chancery Court; J. Y. Stevens, Chancellor affirmed.
Decree affirmed.
Gaughan Sifford, Godwin & Gaughan, for appellant.
S. F Morton, for appellees.
The land involved in this controversy is the north half northeast quarter, section 27, township 10 south, range 15 west, Dallas County, Arkansas. It is located in Road Improvement District No. 1 of Dallas County, Arkansas, created by special act 56 of 1919, and became delinquent for the taxes due said district for the year 1922, payable in 1923, and for some prior years. The Road Improvement District defaulted in the payment of its bonds and interest, and, in the suit of the trustee in the bond issue, was placed in the hands of a receiver by the Federal District Court for the Western Division of the Eastern District of Arkansas, on July 20, 1923. Suit was brought in said district court to foreclose the lien against this and other lands for the delinquent taxes due the road district, which resulted in a decree of foreclosure on January 28, 1925, ordering the delinquent land sold to pay the taxes if not paid within a certain time fixed by the court. The tax on the land in controversy was not paid, the land was sold on March 24, 1925, and, there being no purchasers, same was bid in by the receiver, who was also the commissioner making the sale, for the tax, penalty and costs in the sum of $ 19.79. A deed was made to the receiver and approved by said district court on April 20, 1925. The deed to the receiver contained the following recital: "By the terms of which said order of confirmation the said purchaser takes the lands hereinafter described subject to the lien thereon respectively of the unpaid assessments of said Road Improvement District No. 1 of Dallas County, Arkansas, for any year or years other than the said respective years 1920, 1921, 1922, and subject to the lien of the unpaid assessments of any other improvement district, and subject to the rights of redemption as in said order of confirmation and hereinafter set forth, but in all other respects the said purchaser's title to the lands hereinafter described to be indefeasible and unassailable in either law or equity, and by the terms of which said order of confirmation any person who would have been permitted to redeem the said lands had the sale been made by the Dallas County, Arkansas, Collector for State and county taxes, or who was in possession under color of title at the time of the said decree in said ancillary cause may redeem any of the tracts of land hereinafter described at any time within two years from said March 24, 1925, but not thereafter."
On December 12, 1927, said road district, being then out of the receiver's hands, conveyed said land to appellants for a consideration of $ 24.99.
Appellee, Fordyce Lumber Company, was the owner of the timber on said land and paid all State and county taxes thereon separately from the land, same being separately assessed. In 1924 the land was forfeited to the State for the nonpayment of general taxes, and no exception of the timber was made in extending the taxes against it, although, as above stated, the timber was separately assessed and the general tax thereon fully paid. On December 23, 1927, the State Land Commissioner conveyed all the State's right and title to said land to appellant without excepting the timber therefrom.
In 1927 the Legislature enacted act 112, Acts 1927, p. 312, entitled "An act to provide for the collection and disposition of taxes in road improvement districts, a redemption of land sold for taxes, and for other purposes." Section 14 of said act reads as follows:
This act contained an emergency clause and was approved March 4, 1927. After the land was sold to appellants by the road district and after the period of redemption as fixed by the decree of said district court had expired, but within the period of redemption as enlarged by the above-mentioned act, appellees sought to redeem the land and timber from appellants, tendering them a sufficient sum of money to do so, but same was refused. Appellees thereupon on July 21, 1928, brought this suit to redeem, deposited a sum of money with the clerk of the court of more than enough to redeem said land as a tender thereof in said action. The court sustained appellees' right to redeem, found that $ 87.48 was the amount due appellants to redeem from the sale in the road district and from the State, and including all taxes and special assessments paid by appellants with interest.
For a reversal of the decree appellants contend, (1) that the land was sold to the receiver for the use and benefit of the trustee in the bond issue of the road district and not to the State or a State agency; (2) that if it should be held to be wrong about that proposition,...
To continue reading
Request your trial