People Ex Rel. Mccrea v. Gale
| Decision Date | 30 September 1879 |
| Citation | 93 Ill. 127,1879 WL 8593 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE ex rel. McCreav.E. O. GALE. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. MASON B. LOOMIS, judge, presiding.
This was an application in the court below for judgment against certain real property for delinquent taxes for the current year, to which were added back taxes due on the same property, together with interest, penalty, etc.
One of the objections made to the entry of the judgment was that “the amount for which judgment was asked on lands forfeited was too large, by reason of the addition of interest upon interest and penalty, as well as upon the original taxes.” This objection was sustained, and judgment entered accordingly. The collector appealed.
Mr. CONSIDER H. WILLETT, for the appellant.
Mr. JOHN P. WILSON, for the appellee.
The decision of this case involves the construction of § 129 of the Revenue law of 1872, Laws of 1872, p. 33, which reads as follows:
“In all cases where any real property has heretofore been, or may hereafter be, forfeited to the State for taxes, it shall be the duty of the clerk, when he is making up the amount of tax due on such real property for the current year, to add the amount of back tax, interest, penalty and printer's fees remaining due on such real property, with one year's interest at ten per cent on the amount of tax due, to the tax of the current year, and the aggregate amount so added together shall be collected in like manner as the tax on other real property for that year may be collected: Provided, that the county clerk shall first carefully examine said list, and strike therefrom all errors, and otherwise make such corrections as may be necessary with respect to such property or tax.”
In this case the land had been forfeited to the State for several years, and it is contended on behalf of the people, on the application for judgment against the land, that the “one year's interest at ten per cent” should be computed upon the amount which the property owner would be required by law to pay to redeem the property from the taxes; in other words, in ascertaining the amount for which judgment should be rendered, ten per cent interest should be computed not only on the amount of tax due, but also upon the penalties which had accumulated each year. On the other hand, it is insisted that the interest should be limited to and computed only...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harland v. Eastman
... ... But it is again contended by counsel for appellant that we have in People v. Smith, 94 Ill. 226, sanctioned the compounding of interest in case of ... In neither of these cases is [119 Ill. 29]People v. Gale, 93 Ill. 127, assumed to be overruled. In that case the people contended ... ...
-
Chambers v. People Ex Rel. H. H. Fuller
...years. This interest or per cent is “on all taxes heretofore forfeited,” and “on all taxes hereafter levied and forfeited.” ( People ex rel. v. Gale, 93 Ill. 127; People v. Smith, 94 Id. 228; Belleville Nail Co. v. People ex rel. 98 Id. 399.) In this case it is evident that the clerk, in ex......
-
People Ex Rel. William T. Johnson v. Peacock
...to be included, without reference to any judgment. People v. Smith, 94 Ill. 229. And “one year's interest” is to be added to that. People v. Gale, 93 Ill. 127. And as there is no way in which these taxes can be collected by compulsion until the lands are offered for sale in the next year, i......
-
People v. Smith
... ... 229]been observed prior to the rendition of the judgment. The People v. Gale, 93 Ill. 127.It will be observed, that in defining the duty of the clerk in extending the taxes, no ... ...