Hicks v. Nelson
Decision Date | 06 December 1890 |
Citation | 45 Kan. 47,25 P. 218 |
Parties | B. F. HICKS v. LEWIS NELSON et al |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Error from Wabaunsee District Court.
EJECTMENT. Judgment for defendants, at the October term, 1887. The plaintiff Hicks brings the case to this court.
Judgment affirmed.
Malcolm Nicolson, for plaintiff in error.
Geo. G Cornell, for defendants in error.
OPINION
Action in ejectment for the possession of the east half of the southwest one-fourth of section 8, township 12, range 11 Wabaunsee county, Kansas. Defendants below claim the land under a tax title. The statute provides that "any owner, his agent or attorney, may, at any time within three years from the day of sale, and at any time before the execution of the deed, redeem any land or town lot, sold for taxes, or any part thereof, or interest therein, by paying to the treasurer of the county the amount for which said land was sold, and all subsequent taxes and charges thereon," with interest as provided by the act. The statute also requires the county treasurer, at least four months before the expiration of the time limited for redeeming, lands sold for taxes, to publish in some paper published in, or of general circulation in his county, once a week for four consecutive weeks, a list of all unredeemed lands and town lots, describing each tract or lot as the same was described on the tax roll, stating the name of the person to whom assessed, if any, and the amount of taxes charged, and interest, calculated to the last day of redemption, due on each parcel, and give notice that unless such lands or lots be redeemed on or before the day limited therefor, specifying the same, they will be conveyed to the purchaser.
The trial court made the following findings of fact, to wit:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bruce v. Pope
... ... v. Quinchard, 119 Cal. 87, 51 P. 24; People v ... Rose, 167 Ill. 147, 47 N.E. 547; City of Chicago v ... Vulcan Iron Works, 93 Ill. 222; Hicks v ... Nelson, 45 Kan. 47, 25 P. 218; Gage v. Davis, ... 129 Ill. 236, 21 N.E. 788; Backer v. Pyne, 130 Ind ... 288, 30 N.E. 21; Street v. United ... ...
-
Bruce v. Pope
...Quinchard, 119 Cal. 87, 51 Pac. 24;People v. Rose, 167 Ill. 147, 47 N. E. 547;Chicago v. Iron Works, 93 Ill. 222;Hicks v. Nelson, 45 Kan. 47, 25 Pac. 218, 23 Am. St. Rep. 709;Gage v. Davis, 129 Ill. 236, 21 N. E. 788, 16 Am. St. Rep. 260;Backer v. Pyne, 130 Ind. 288, 30 N. E. 21, 30 Am. St.......
-
State ex rel. Hunzicker v. Pulliam
... ... think that such rule should govern upon general ... principles." ... That ... case was followed in Hicks v. Nelson, 45 Kan. 47, 25 ... P. 218, 23 Am. St. Rep. 709. In the case of Spencer v ... Haug, 45 Minn. 231, 47 N.W. 794, the Supreme Court of ... ...
-
State ex rel. Hunzicker v. Pulliam
...Besides, we would also think that such rule should govern upon general principles." ¶21 That case was followed in Hicks v. Nelson, 45 Kan. 47, 32 Am. St. Rep. 709, 25 P. 218. In the case of Spencer v. Haug, 45 Minn. 231, 47 N.W. 794, the Supreme Court of that state held that: "Section 82, c......