Hecht v. Wilson
| Decision Date | 11 January 1933 |
| Parties | HECHT et al. v. WILSON. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
En Banc.
On petition for rehearing.
Petition denied.
For former opinion, see 144 So. 886.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; Uly O. Thompson, Judge.
Ira C Haycock, of Miami, Cary D. Landis, Atty. Gen., and Marvin C McIntosh, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellants.
H. H Eyles, of Miami, for appellee.
If, as we have held in our opinion of December 15, 1932 (144 So 886) the complainant, in filling a bill to foreclose his mortgage, has no right to join as a party defendant thereto one holding adversely to both mortgagor and mortgagee under a claim of paramount title, and if, as we have also held, one who claims under a tax deed is to be deemed to be one holding under a paramount title, the showing in an answer that a defendant joined as such party defendant claims solely and only under a tax deed, whether rightfully or wrongfully in law, is sufficient to bring such defendant within the rule entitling such defendant to be relieved from litigating his claim in the foreclosure suit, and is sufficient to entitle such defendant to dismissal from the cause as not having been a proper party defendant to the foreclosure suit when it was first begun. See Wood v. Franklin Life Ins. Co. (C. C. A.) 17 F. (2d) page 80.
Undoubtedly the mere assertion of a paramount claim by a defendant does not preclude the court from proceeding to determine in the foreclosure case whether a tax deed has in fact been issued covering the mortgaged property, before making an order dismissing as to such defendant. Nothing in our first opinion was intended to so hold.
But to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the court to enter upon any inquiry, however limited, as to the validity of a tax deed that has, in fact, been issued, would be to hold that in a foreclosure case the court may proceed to adjudicate, to some extent at least, claims of paramount title, adverse to both mortgagor and mortgagee, which is not a permissible procedure under the rule laid down in Brown v. Atlanta National Bldg. & Loan Ass'n, 46 Fla. 492, 35 So. 403, 404.
In the case last cited, this court declared that the 'scope of a foreclosure suit' is merely to enforce the mortgage lien against the title or interests of mortgagor, and those claiming under him.
A tax deed holder claims under a new and original title, entirely disconnected with that of the former owner or mortgagor. Dean v. Kane (Fla.) 143 So. 656. If his claim is invalid because his deed is ineffective to convey him the paramount title he claims, that question can, of course, be adjudicated and decided, but not in a foreclosure suit between a mortgagor and mortgagee who dealt with the land under the pre-existing title that the tax deed would have destroyed when it was issued, if such tax deed by not held to be invalid in a proper suit.
A tax certificate which has ripened into title under a statute (Comp. Gen. Laws 1927, § 1546) providing that such certificate, after two years, shall be deemed to vest title in fee simple in the trustees of the internal improvement...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reed v. Fain, 31122
...a tax deed creates a new and independent title which is paramount to and 'entirely disconnected with' the former title. Hecht v. Wilson, 107 Fla. 421, 145 So. 250, denying rehearing and modifying 107 Fla. 421, 144 So. 886; Daniell v. Sherrill, Fla., 1950, 48 So.2d 736, 23 A.L.R.2d Although ......
-
Addison v. Benedict, 68--95
...included in the tax assessment roll. See Dean v. Kane, 1932, 106 Fla. 814, 143 So. 656; Hecht v. Wilson, 1932, 107 Fla. 421, 144 So. 886, 145 So. 250; Torreyson v. Dutton, 1939, 137 Fla. 683, 188 So. 805, 190 So. 430; Daniell v. Sherrill, Fla.1950, 48 So.2d 736; 23 A.L.R.2d 1410; 31 Fla.Jur......
-
Williams v. Robineau
...rule announced in Brown v. Atlanta National Building & Loan Ass'n, 46 Fla. 492, 35 So. 403; Hecht v. Wilson, 107 Fla. 421, 144 So. 886, 145 So. 250. See, also, Jones v. Florida Homes Company, 95 Fla. 964, 117 So. 228. We have read Stuart v. Stephanus, supra, and other cases relied on to sup......
-
Florida Bd. of Forestry v. Lindsay, 67--160
...held that a tax deed vests in the Grantee a new, independent and paramount title. Hecht v. Wilson, 107 Fla. 421, 144 So. 886, Modified 145 So. 250; Bauman v. Healy, 141 Fla. 478, 193 So. 773; Torreyson v. Dutton, 137 Fla. 683, 188 So. 805, 190 So. 'The tax deeds here under consideration rec......