Newman v. Westcott

• Decision Date: 01 January 1886
• Citation: 29 F. 49
• Parties: NEWMAN v. WESTCOTT and another.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa

29 F. 49

NEWMAN v. WESTCOTT and another.

United States Circuit Court, N.D. Iowa, Western Division.

October Term, 1886

Rickel & Bull, for complainant.

Gatch Connor & Weaver, for defendants.

SHIRAS J.

In the bill filed herein complainant avers that he is the owner, and seized of the fee-simple title of certain real estate situated in Sioux county, Iowa, and is entitled to the possession thereof; that the defendants claim some interest therein adverse to complainant, basing such claim upon certain tax deeds executed in 1872; that the defendant Westcott is in the actual possession of the property; that the tax deeds under which defendants claim are wholly void for various reasons set forth in the bill; that the defendant Westcott has received the rents and profits of the land for the last three years, the same being of the value of $450 that complainant is ready and willing to pay all legal taxes that may have been paid upon said premises by the defendants or their grantors, upon their paying and accounting to him for the rents and profits; and complainant prays that the title to the realty, and the right to possession thereof, be decreed to complainant; that the clouds created by the tax deeds be removed; that an accounting be had between complainant and defendants of the taxes paid, and rents and profits received, and judgment be rendered for the balance thereof. To this bill the defendant Lindsey answers, averring that he has now no interest in said realty, having sold and conveyed said premises by warranty deed to his co-defendant on the thirteenth day of June, 1884. The defendant Westcott demurs to the bill on the ground that the facts averred in the bill do not constitute a cause cognizable in a court of equity, there being a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law.

In the case of Whitehead v. Entwhistle, 27 F. 778, this court had occasion to review the authorities upon this subject, and it is not necessary to do more than to refer to that case, and the authorities therein cited, upon the general questions presented by the demurrer.

It is too well settled to need argument, or a citation of authorities, that, in the courts of the United States, a bill in equity cannot be maintained if there exists a plain speedy, and adequate remedy at law applicable to the facts of the particular case, and that where a person holding the legal title to realty desires to assert that title, and to...