Harris v. Little Red River Levee Dist. No. 2, 4-3374.

Citation69 S.W.2d 877
Decision Date26 February 1934
Docket NumberNo. 4-3374.,4-3374.
PartiesHARRIS v. LITTLE RED RIVER LEVEE DIST. NO. 2.
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

Gordon Armitage and Brundidge & Neelly, all of Searcy, for appellant.

Culbert L. Pearce, of Searcy, for appellees.

HUMPHREYS, Justice.

Appellees brought suit in the chancery court of White county to obtain separate judgments against the S. W. ¼ of the N. W. ¼ and the N. W. ¼ of the S. W. ¼, Sec. 32, Tp. 8 N., Range 5 W., in said county, for taxes due upon betterments assessed against said lands, alleging that the amount due the levee district for the years 1927 to 1932, inclusive was $347.88, and that the amount due the drainage district was $849.72.

Appellant, who purchased said lands from the state of Arkansas on the 12th day of April, 1932, for $108, filed an answer alleging that the district taxes sought to be recovered against the lands in question were forever barred and extinguished when the state's tax title which he bought was confirmed on April 11, 1932, under the provisions of Act No. 296, p. 1235, of the Acts of 1929. Relative to the confirmation of the tax title to said lands in the state, the answer of appellant contained the following specific allegation: "On the 2nd day of September, 1931, the State of Arkansas under and by virtue of Act No. 296 of the General Assembly of the State, filed suit to quiet and confirm its title in and to the said lands. The plaintiffs herein, being the owners of said land, intervened and were made parties to said suit at their own request. Cross complaint was filed setting up various reasons as to why title should not be confirmed, refusing and neglecting, however, to comply with the provisions of p. 8 of said Act 296 which afforded them an opportunity to protect their rights. On the 11th day of April, 1932, this court sustained a demurrer to the intervention and cross complaint of the plaintiffs herein and gave a decree in which title to the lands described in the complaint of the plaintiff were quieted and confirmed in the State of Arkansas."

Appellees filed a demurrer to the answer, which was sustained; whereupon appellee elected to stand upon his answer.

The court then found that the special improvement taxes due appellees prior to April 11, 1932, were extinguished by the confirmation decree, but that the special improvement taxes accruing after the confirmation decree were valid and subsisting liens upon the lands, and ordered separate decrees of foreclosure for same in favor of appellees, and ordered the lands sold to satisfy said liens, and decreed that deeds be executed by the commissioner who was ordered to make the sale at the expiration of five years, the redemption period fixed in Act No. 43, p. 123, of the Acts 1915.

Appellant has prosecuted an appeal to this court from that part of the decree fixing the lien upon the lands for improvement taxes accruing after the date of the decree confirming the title to said lands in the state.

Appellees have prosecuted a cross-appeal to this court from that part of the decree barring the collection of the improvement taxes which accrued prior to the date of the decree confirming the title to said lands in the state and in directing the commissioner to execute a certificate instead of a deed to the purchaser.

The pleadings reflect that the lands were forfeited and sold to the state of Arkansas for the nonpayment of the taxes from the year 1928, and that, after two years from the date of the sale, they were certified to the office of the commissioner of state lands, and that the title thereto was confirmed in the state on the 11th day of April, 1932, under the provisions of Act No. 296 of the Acts of 1929. The pleadings also reflect that the lands were included in appellees' levee and drainage districts, which were organized in 1914, and were subject to special improvement taxes therein at the time same were forfeited to and the title confirmed in the state.

The pleadings also reflect that appellees were the owners of the lands by purchase for delinquent improvement taxes at the time the state instituted suit to confirm the title thereto and intervened in the suit for the purpose of attacking the forfeiture of the sale of the lands to the state and were denied the right to do so because they refused to tender or pay the taxes due the state. The intervention of appellees was filed in the confirmation suit under authority of section 8 of Act No. 296, p. 1239, of the Acts of 1929. Said section 8 is as follows: "Any special improvement district claiming that there is owing to it overdue taxes on any land described in the State's petition shall have the right to be made a party defendant to the State's suit for the purpose of contesting the sale under which the forfeiture to the State...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT