LaNgan v. Binfield

• Decision Date: 02 December 1896
• Citation: 49 Neb. 857,69 N.W. 123
• Parties: LANGAN v. BINFIELD ET AL.
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

49 Neb. 857

69 N.W. 123

LANGAN

v.BINFIELD ET AL.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

Dec. 2, 1896.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. The statutes relating to the leasing of school lands provide, among other things, that no assignment of a lease contract shall be valid unless the same be entered of record in the office of the commissioner of public lands and buildings. Other sections provide for the forfeiture of leases for nonpayment of rent, and the releasing of the land, with a further provision that the owner of any contract of lease so forfeited may redeem the same by paying all delinquencies and costs at any time before such land is again sold or leased. Held, that the provision with regard to assignments is for the protection of the state, and that no assignee obtains any right, as against the state, until the assignment has been entered of record.

2. That an assignee whose assignment has not been so entered of record is not entitled to redeem from a forfeiture of the lease.

Appeal from district court, Hall county; Harrison, Judge.

Action by Mary A. Langan against Robert Binfield and others to redeem from a forfeiture of a lease of school lands, and for injunction. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Abbott & Caldwell, for appellant.

W. H. Thompson, for appellees.

IRVINE, C.

In 1890, William Harnan leased from the state certain school lands in Hall county. Thereafter he assigned the leases to his daughter, Mrs. Langan, the appellant. The assignments were not entered of record in the office of the commissioner of public lands and buildings. Mrs. Langan, however, entered, and made certain improvements. Default having been made in the payments of rent, notice was given of a proposed forfeiture of the lease by sending such notice by means of registered letter to Harnan, and also by newspaper publication. In the view we take of the case, it is not necessary to pass upon the validity of the notice. Payment not having been made within the prescribed period, the board of public lands and buildings declared a forfeiture of the lease. Thereafter Binfield applied in due form for a lease of the land, and paid to the county treasurer of Hall county the requisite rental, the treasurer issuing his receipt therefor. Before the commissioner of public lands and buildings had executed to Binfield a lease, Mrs. Langan tendered to the treasurer of Hall county a sufficient sum to cover all delinquencies and costs, for the purpose of redeeming from the said forfeiture. The tender was refused, and she instituted this action against Binfield, the county treasurer, and the commissioner of public lands and buildings for the purpose of enforcing her claim for redemption, and enjoining the officers from executing any lease to Binfield. The district court found for the defendants, and dismissed the case. Mrs. Langan appeals.

The statutes most particularly applicable to the case are sections 14 and 16, c. 80, art. 1, Comp. St. Section 14 provides for the leasing of unsold school lands, and contains the following: “Upon a failure to pay the agreed rental for the period of six months from the time said payments are due, the said lease may be forfeited and fully set aside as provided in section sixteen of this act; and no assignment of such lease contract shall be valid unless the same be entered of record in the office of the commissioner of public lands and buildings.” Section 16 provides for the forfeiture of leases, and closes as follows: “The owner of any contract of sale or lease so forfeited, may redeem the same by paying all delinquencies and costs at any time before such land is again sold or leased.” A question much discussed in the briefs is whether by the receipt of Binfield's money and application the land had been again leased before the execution of a formal contract, within the meaning of the last provision. This question we do not find it necessary to consider. The provision of section 14 quoted requires as essential to the validity of an assignment that it be entered of record in the office of the commissioner of public lands and buildings. This requirement Mrs. Langan had not complied with. This being true, we think she has not shown any rights as against the...