Morris v. Grauberger

• Decision Date: 05 April 1915
• Docket Number: 7972.
• Citation: 147 P. 674,59 Colo. 164
• Parties: MORRIS v. GRAUBERGER et al.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

147 P. 674

59 Colo. 164

MORRIS v. GRAUBERGER et al.

No. 7972.

Supreme Court of Colorado

April 5, 1915

Error to District Court, Logan County; H. P. Burke, Judge.

Action by Nellie S. Morris against Jonas Grauberger and another. Judgment for defendant Grauberger, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.

John F Mail, of Denver, for plaintiff in error.

McConley & Hinkley, of Sterling, for defendant in error.

GABBERT C.J.

Plaintiff in error brought an action in ejectment against defendant in error, Grauberger, and another, to recover possession of a quarter section of land in Logan county. Judgment was in favor of Grauberger, and plaintiff brings the case here for review on error.

To establish her title, plaintiff introduced in evidence two tax deeds, one based on a tax sale for the delinquent taxes of 1889, and another on a tax sale for the delinquent taxes of 1891. She also introduced conveyances from which it appears that the title obtained by the grantees in these tax deeds has been conveyed to her. To establish his title, defendant Grauberger introduced in evidence a tax deed to the Municipal Debenture Company, based on a tax sale for the delinquent taxes of 1893. The land in controversy was levied upon as the property of the Municipal Debenture Company, under an execution issued on a judgment in favor of one Gillett, and against the Debenture Company. On this sale a sheriff's deed was issued to Gillett, and it was stipulated at the trial that whatever title Gillett obtained by the sheriff's deed was vested in the defendant Grauberger. The basis of the title of the Debenture Company was the tax deed issued to it, and to which we have referred. The judgment roll in the case of Gillett against the Debenture Company was admitted in evidence, and it is claimed on the part of plaintiff that from this source it appears the judgment against the Debenture Company was void and of no effect, because it appears that the company was never served with a summons in the action.

It is unnecessary to determine whether or not the judgment roll exhibits facts relative to the service of summons on the Debenture Company under which the sheriff's deed issued which renders the judgment void. The tax deed issued to the Debenture Company is not attacked, nor claimed to be invalid. It was issued on a sale of the premises for taxes levied at a later date than those upon which the tax deeds under which plaintiff claims...