Langdon v. Stewart
| Decision Date | 23 October 1886 |
| Parties | LANGDON v. STEWART. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
A.J. Waterman, for tenant.
It seems that the court did not pass upon the evidence offered by the tenant "tending to show that John J. Stewart was in the possession of the premises on May 1, 1873." "The demandant claimed that the collector's notice, sale, and deed were insufficient to convey a valid title, to the premises therein described, to the tenant." "The court so ruled, and found in the demandant's favor for five undivided ninths of the demanded premises." The question as to whom the tax was assessed was left undecided, and all that the demandant asked to be determined was as to "the collector's notice, sale, and deed."
The notice was sufficient in form, and the recital in the deed does not necessarily show that the sale was not made "at the post-office in Montville." The post-office might have been on the premises.
Taken together, the notice and deed are sufficient in law, and if the court had found, upon the tenant's evidence, "tending to show" that John J. Stewart, to whom the tax was assessed, was in possession of the premises on May 1, 1873, that such was the fact, the demandant could not maintain this action, and the court ought to have decided that question. Gen.St. c. 11, § 8; Id. c. 12, §§ 22, 23; Pub.St. c. 11, § 13; Id. c. 12, §§ 24, 35.
The only material exception is to the ruling that the tax deed conveyed no title to the tenant. Gen.St. c. 12, § 35, required that the deed "shall state the cause of the sale;" and section 22, Id., provided that taxes on real estate may be levied "by sale thereof, if the tax is not paid within 14 days after a demand of payment," etc. This deed recites that "no person has appeared to discharge said tax," and that the collector "has demanded the same of John J. Stewart, the reported owner of said real estate;" but there is no statement that 14 days elapsed after the demand before advertising the premises for sale, or that the tax was not paid within 14 days after the demand. A demand made on the day of the sale would satisfy the recitals in the deed. The deed is therefore void. Harrington v. Worcester, 6 Allen, 576; Adams v. Mills, 126 Mass. 278.
The other objections to the deed need not be considered. Exceptions overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial