Metcalfe v. Wise

• Decision Date: 26 January 1931
• Docket Number: 29178
• Citation: 159 Miss. 54,132 So. 102
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: METCALFE v. WISE et al

132 So. 102

159 Miss. 54

METCALFE v. WISE et al

No. 29178

Supreme Court of Mississippi

January 26, 1931

Division B

1 TAXATION.

Bill to establish tax title, not averring original title had passed out of government, held insufficient.

2 EQUITY.

Final decree, though on decree pro confesso, would have been reversible, if not void, where bill stated no cause of action.

3 TAXATION. Allegations of answer to bill to establish tax title held merely general traverse, and therefore no answer at all (Code 1930, section 380).

Only denials or averments in answer to bill to establish tax title, touching tax deed or tax title, was denial that complainant was owner of land and denial that alleged sale for taxes was valid, and that alleged tax deed conferred any title upon complainants.

4. EQUITY.

If bill was sufficient, complainant after ordering case to issue docket on bill and answer, which, in effect, was no answer at all, would have been entitled to decree (Code 1930, section 380).

HON. J. L. WILLIAMS, Chancellor.

APPEAL from chancery court of Washington county, HON. J. L. WILLIAMS, Chancellor.

Suit by Martha Metcalfe against John Wise and others. Decree for defendants, and complainant appeals. Affirmed.

Affirmed.

A. H. Turnage, of Greenville, for appellant.

Appellees' answer merely denied the allegations of appellant's bill. Since there are so many reasons why tax deeds may be fatally defective appellee should have given some notice on which one of them he intended to rely, and especially since he asked for affirmative relief.

The motion to require more spceific answer should have been sustained.

Griffith on Mississippi Chancery Practice, chapter on answers.

It is the province of this court to interpret the meaning of these ordinances rather than their exact wording. Section 3813 of the Code of 1892 was amended by chapter 199 of the Laws of 1908 changing the day for county sales from the first Monday in March to the first Monday in April. The city of Greenville did not change their ordinance until after this sale was made, but the said city council adopted this chapter on revenue attempting and intending that the date of tax sales in the city should conform to the date of state and county sales. It evidently meant that as said chapter of the Code of 1892 was amended then the city ordinance would be automatically amended so as to conform with the legislative change.

Percy Bell, of Greenville, for appellees.

The city of Greenville operates under its own charter and at the time the sale complained of was made its ordinance provided that all of the provisions of chapter 116 entitled "Revenue of the Annotated Code of 1892 of the State of Mississippi" should apply to the city council of Greenville and such ordinance was not amended until 1927.

Chapter 116 of the Code of 1892, provided that all sales should be made on the first Monday in March. This sale was made the first Monday in April.

Such amendments as were contemplated by the city adopting ordinances of 1900 were only such amendments as were made to the Code at the time of the adoption.

Planter's Gin & Milling Co. v. City of Greenville, 103 So. 796.

OPINION

Griffith, J.

Appellant filed her bill to establish her tax title against appellees and to cancel as clouds the asserted title of appellees. The bill showed that the lot in question was sold for city taxes by the city tax collector, on the first Monday in April 1926, and was unredeemed. The tax deed was made an...