Lauer v. Weber

• Decision Date: 21 December 1898
• Parties: LAUER v. WEBER.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

177 Ill. 115

52 N.E. 489

LAUER

v.WEBER.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 21, 1898.

Error to superior court, Cook county; H. M. Shephard, Judge.

Bill by Caroline Weber against Mary Lauer. From a decree for complainant, defendant brings error. Affirmed.Ernst F. Herrmann and J. Kent Green, for plaintiff in error.

J. H. Frendenthal, for defendant in error.

This is a bill originally filed on February 27, 1896, by the defendant in error, Caroline Weber, against the plaintiff in error, Mary Lauer, to set aside a tax deed and a quitclaim deed based thereon, as clouds upon the title of the defendant in error. The original bill alleges that the defendant in error is the owner of a certain lot in Sheffield's addition to Chicago; that the same was sold by the county clerk of Cook county on October 5, 1893, for the general taxes of 1892, and purchased at such tax sale by Daniel J. Hubbard; that a tax deed, dated January 30, 1896, and recorded on February 9, 1896, was executed to said Hubbard; that by quitclaim deed dated February 13, 1896, and recorded February 16, 1896, said premises were conveyed by said Hubbard to the plaintiff in error, Mary Lauer. The bill further alleges that said tax sale and tax deed were void by reason of certain defects in the affidavits upon which the tax deed was issued, and which were filed with the county clerk. The bill still further alleges that on February 27, 1896, defendant in error tendered to the plaintiff in error a sum of money, sufficient to cover all reasonable costs for the payment of said taxes, and demanded of her that she execute a quitclaim deed to defendant in error; that plaintiff in error refused to comply with such request; and in the bill defendant in error offers to pay to plaintiff in error the amount of the taxes for which the premises were sold, and the amounts of all the payments of taxes subsequently made under said tax sale, or tax deed, or quitclaim, with interest at 6 per cent. from the date of the sale. The bill prays that the tax deed to Hubbard, and the deed of Hubbard to plaintiff in error, may be set aside, and declared void, as clouds upon the title of defendant in error, and that the same may be decreed to be delivered up and canceled. Demurrer was filed to the bill, and overruled, and leave was given to the plaintiff in error, Mary Lauer, to answer. Plaintiff in error filed an answer, denying the material allegations of the bill as herein set forth. The answer further states that Hubbard, on May 7, 1896, more than two, and less than three, years after the said sale, filed with the county clerk of Cook county certain new and additional affidavits, with the tax notice thereto attached, which are appended to the answer; that upon delivery to the county clerk of said new affidavits and notice the county clerk executed and delivered to Hubbard, on May 7, 1896, a tax deed, conveying said premises to him, for the nonpayment of the taxes of the year 1892, which deed was recorded on May 13, 1896; that on May 7, 1896, Hubbard, by quitclaim deed of that date, recorded on May 13, 1896, conveyed said premises to Mary Lauer, the plaintiff in error. Subsequently, on June 13, 1896, the defendant in error filed a supplemental bill, making Hubbard a party defendant. Default was entered against Hubbard. Mary Lauer filed an answer to the supplemental bill. Thereafter defendant in error filed an amended supplemental bill, reciting the matter of the original bill and answer thereto, and also, by way of supplement, alleging that, after the filing of the original bill, Hubbard filed with the county clerk certain affidavits, and that upon the filing of said affidavits with said clerk the original tax deed issued to Hubbard was surrendered to said clerk, and the latter made to said Hubbard a new tax deed; that thereupon, on May 7, 1896, Hubbard executed a new quitclaim deed to said Mary Lauer. It is alleged that such filing of additional affidavits and execution of a new tax deed and a new quitclaim deed were illegal acts, and that the second tax deed is void. The amended supplemental bill prays that the judgment for taxes against said lot and the proceedings thereon and the tax deeds to Hubbard and the quitclaim deeds to Mary Lauer may be set aside, and delivered up, and canceled, as clouds upon the title of the defendant in error. The plaintiff in error, Mary Lauer, filed an answer to the amended supplemental bill, admitting the filing of the additional affidavits with the county clerk as above set forth, and the surrender of the first tax deed to the clerk, and the execution of a new tax deed to Hubbard, and of a quitclaim deed by Hubbard to plaintiff in error, on May 7, 1896. The plaintiff in error claims title under such additional proceedings. On September 27, 1897, the court below entered a decree finding defendant in error to be the owner of the premises in question; that said tax deeds and affidavits and quitclaim deed were void, and clouds upon the title of the defendant in error, and that the same should be removed. The decree adjudged in accordance with the findings, and ordered that such deeds be canceled and set aside upon the defendant in error paying to the plaintiff in error the amount of the tax sale, and all payments of taxes made under the tax sale and judgment, respectively, from their dates to the date of the decree. The present appeal is prosecuted from such decree of the superior court of Cook county.

MAGRUDER, J. (after stating the facts).

Section 216 of the revenue act provides that the purchaser at a tax sale, or his assignee, shall comply with certain conditions therein specified, before he shall be entitled to a deed of the land purchased at such tax sale. Section 217 of the act provides that every such purchaser or assignee, by himself or agent, shall, before he shall be entitled to a particularly the facts relied on as such with the conditions of section 216, stating particlarly the facts relied on as such compliance, and shall deliver such affidavit to the person authorized by law to execute the tax deed. 3 Starr & C. Ann. St. (2d Ed.) pp. 3487, 3490. In this case the original affidavits were filed, and the original tax deed was issued, in January, 1896. Hubbard, to whom the tax deed was issued, executed a quitclaim deed of the premises to the plaintiff in error on February 13, 1896. The original bill herein was filed on February 27, 1896. After the original bill was filed, the original tax deed issued to Hubbard, and dated January 30, 1896, was surrendered to the county clerk, and additional affidavits were filed, and a subsequent tax deed was issued to Hubbard, on May 7, 1896. The main question presented by the record is whether a purchaser at a tax sale, having filed affidavits under section 217 with the county clerk, and having procured the issuance of a tax deed to himself, can thereafter surrender such tax deed, and file additional affidavits, as additional evidence of his compliance with the law, and thereafter have a subsequent tax deed issued to him. The bill...