Hintrager v. Traut
| Decision Date | 22 April 1886 |
| Citation | 27 N.W. 807,69 Iowa 746 |
| Parties | HINTRAGER v. TRAUT |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from Dubuque District Court.
MANDAMUS to compel defendant, Traut, who is the treasurer of the city of Dubuque, to execute a tax deed for a certain lot sold for delinquent city taxes. A demurrer by defendant to plaintiff's reply to his answer was sustained; and plaintiff standing on his pleading, judgment was entered for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.
AFFIRMED.
De Witt C. Cram, for appellant.
Powers & Lacy and D. J. Linehan, for appellee.
OPINION
I.
The following facts are shown by the pleading against which defendant's demurrer was directed: June 12, 1876, the lot involved in this suit was sold at a sale for city taxes, and on the twenty-first day of the same month the purchaser assigned the certificate of purchase issued upon the sale to plaintiff. On the first day of March, 1884, plaintiff caused notice of the expiration of the time for redemption to be served on the proper persons, and, no redemption from the sale having been made, plaintiff, on the twelfth day of June, 1884, demanded a tax deed, at the same time tendering the fee provided by the city ordinance. The treasurer refused to execute the deed. The city ordinance under which the sale was made provides that, at the expiration of two years and nine months after a sale, a purchaser may give notice to the land-owner of the expiration of the time for redemption, and ninety days after the service of such notice the treasurer is authorized to execute a deed. Other facts disclosed in the pleadings need not be stated, as the decisive question upon which we determine the case involves the foregoing facts, and no others.
II. The question presented by the demurrer which we shall consider and determine is this: Was the action barred by the statute of limitations? It will be observed that plaintiff could have given notice of the expiration of the time for redemption March 12, 1879, which was two years and nine months after the sale. June 12, 1879, had the notice been given, plaintiff would have been entitled to a tax deed. This suit was commenced June 16, 1884. Counsel for plaintiff concede that the action of mandamus is barred in three years after the cause thereof accrues. When did plaintiff's cause of action accrue? Under the city ordinance he could have been entitled to a deed June 12, 1879. His right thereto at that time depended upon his own action. His right was complete to a deed, so far as all acts and proceedings were concerned, except his own act, over which he had control. The law, as it...
To continue reading
Request your trial