Robertson v. Howard

Decision Date11 June 1910
Docket Number16,462. 16,463
Citation109 P. 696,82 Kan. 588
PartiesFRED ROBERTSON et al., Appellees, v. C. F. HOWARD, Appellant. FRED ROBERTSON et al., Appellees, v. FRED HOWARD, Appellant
CourtKansas Supreme Court

Filed June 11, 1910. [Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Appeal from Rawlins district court; WILLIAM H. PRATT, judge. Opinion filed June 11, 1910. Affirmed.

STATEMENT.

CASE No. 16,462 was tried in the court below without a jury, under an agreement that all the evidence, findings and proceedings should apply equally to case No. 16,463, and the findings of fact and conclusions of law made by the court therein are as follow:

"FINDINGS OF FACT.

"This is an action in ejectment, brought by the said plaintiffs against the defendants to recover possession of the southeast quarter of section sixteen (16) in township one (1), of range thirty-four (34), in Rawlins county, Kansas, and for the rents of the same. At the March, 1908, term of the court a jury was duly waived by all the parties and the trial was had to the court. At the same time the parties in this action and also the parties in the action number 2675, pending in this court, in which the plaintiffs in this action are also plaintiffs, and Fred Howard and John Nevil are defendants agreed in open court that whatever the judgment and decision of this court might be in this first-mentioned action, No 2676, the same should be held and considered to be applicable to, and a determination of, the last-mentioned case, all parties waiving a jury in said action as in the first. This action having been duly submitted to the court, the same was by the court taken under advisement until the November, 1908, term of this court.

"(1) The land involved in this suit is what is known in this state as school land, and the plaintiffs claim title thereto under the original purchaser thereof, and from assignments had from him and his grantors, and the defendant, C. F. Howard, claims title and ownership to the land by virtue of certain tax proceedings and schoolland contract sale hereinafter referred to.

"(2) On the 22d day of December, 1884, a certificate of purchase was, by the county clerk of said Rawlins county, duly issued to a qualified purchaser for the sum of $ 480, and the purchaser at that time duly paid the one-tenth thereof, being $ 48, and by a succession of assignments one John H. Hagener became the owner of certificate of purchase and all rights to the land thereby contracted for or conveyed. The said Hagener became such owner on the 28th day of October, 1901.

"(3) Some time prior to the sale of land for taxes in said county, on September 3, 1901, the provisions of chapter 162, Laws of Kansas of 1891, being paragraph 7659 of the General Statutes of the state of Kansas for 1901, were duly adopted by said county, and such law so adopted remained in full force and effect during all the years relating to the tax proceedings hereinafter mentioned.

"(4) On the 3d day of September, 1901, at a sale of lands for said county for delinquent taxes, the said land was by the county treasurer of said county of Rawlins, under and by virtue of the provisions of said chapter 162, Laws of Kansas for 1891, bid off in the name of said county for the delinquent taxes of the year 1900, for the sum of $ 14.80, and afterward, and on September 28, 1903, the county clerk of said county assigned the tax-sale certificate to said land to defendant C. F. Howard for the sum of $ 19.90.

"(5) The said sale of lands was had and held under and by virtue of a notice of such sale, in words and figures as follows: 'Delinquent Tax List. Office of county treasurer, Rawlins county, Kansas. Atwood, Kan., July 15, 1901. Notice is hereby given that taxes for the year 1900 on the following land and town lots remain due and unpaid, and so much of each lot or parcel of land as may be necessary will be sold at the county treasurer's office at public sale on the first Tuesday in September, 1901, and the next succeeding days, for the taxes, costs and penalties. F. L. Schwab, county treasurer.' Then follows a list of this and other lands.

"(6) Proof of the publication of this notice was never transmitted or deposited in the county clerk's office of said county. As a part of the costs of the assignment of said tax-sale certificate, and included therein, were the costs of sale of said land for the years of 1902 and 1903, and a redemption fee of fifty cents.

"(7) That upon these tax proceedings the county clerk of said county executed to defendant, Howard, a certificate of purchase of school land, upon the 28th day of September, 1903; afterward, and on December 18, 1903, the said clerk issued to defendant Howard a renewal certificate of purchase, in place of the former, and by virtue thereof defendant Howard entered into possession of said land and has ever since held possession thereof and received the rents thereon. Defendant Nevil makes no claim by answer, or otherwise, in this case. Upon these tax proceedings and certificate of school land issued by virtue thereof defendant Howard claims the right to said land.

"(8) In 1904, and prior to November 12 of said year, the said John H. Hagener was in the United States district court, southern division of the state of Illinois, and, by virtue of the judgment and order thereof, duly adjudged a bankrupt, and all of his property, including the said certificate of purchase of the land involved in this action, was placed in the hands and custody of said court as the property and assets of said bankrupt's estate, and one R. R. Hewitt was duly appointed and qualified as the trustee of said bankrupt's estate, and he duly entered upon his duties as such officer.

"(9) That on the 12th day of November, 1904, by virtue of an order made by said court so to do, a public sale, at the city of Beardstown, in the state of Illinois, was had, by the said trustee, of the assets of said bankrupt, including the said certificate of purchase, and at such sale one Henry Fraumann offered by his bid the sum of $ 115 for said certificate of purchase and some other property of said bankrupt, and the said bid was, by the said trustee, accepted, and the sale being afterward reported to said court, the same was approved and confirmed by said court, and by virtue thereof the said trustee, on November 30, 1904, assigned and delivered the said certificate of purchase to the said Henry Fraumann.

"(10) That afterward the said Henry Fraumann and his wife, on July 19, 1905, sold, assigned and transferred and delivered the said certificate of purchase and his right to any rents of said lands, if any he had therein, to plaintiff, Fred Robertson, and thereafter, and on the 5th day of August, 1905, the said Fred Robertson and wife sold, assigned and delivered an undivided half interest in and to said certificate to said land, if any he had, as well as an undivided one-half interest in and to any rents or profits he had therein, to the said W. J. Ratcliff.

"(11) That thereafter, and on the 19th day of June, 1907, the said John H. Hagener and wife made, executed and delivered to the plaintiffs a quitclaim deed to said land, and also their assignment of said certificate of purchase, as well as their rights, if any, in and to any rents and profits of said land.

"(12) That upon the 20th day of November, 1907, the said John H. Hagener was duly discharged as such bankrupt from all his debts provable under the bankrupt law, and therafter, and on the same day, the said R. R. Hewitt, as such trustee, was duly discharged and the said bankrupt proceedings were fully and finally closed up and disposed of.

"(13) That said John H. Hagener and his grantors paid all the taxes upon said land up to the year 1900, and caused to be broken all of land, before the defendant acquired his tax-sale certificate to said land.

"(14) On August 15, 1905, plaintiffs tendered to the county treasurer of said county the sum of $ 630 lawful money, $ 170 of which was for the benefit of defendant Howard, and which was the full amount that was then due the state of Kansas, the said county of Rawlins and the defendant, Howard, each of which tenders were refused, although they fully covered everything that was then due, and such tenders have ever since been held good.

"(15) That thereafter, and on the 5th day of January, 1907, in an action then pending in the supreme court of the state of Kansas, in which the plaintiffs herein were plaintiffs and the county treasurer of said county was defendant, a peremptory writ of mandamus was by said court issued to said county treasurer to take the said money so tendered to him by said plaintiffs, the said $ 630, and as such officer receipt therefor, which he did, and such order, so far as the receipt and acceptance of such tender is final only as to the parties to said action, and thereafter and before the commencement of this action a patent for said land was issued to plaintiffs.

"(16) That the rents and profits of said land, so far as received by defendant, Howard, amount to the sum of $ 150, and the rental value of said land is $ 50 per annum.

"CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.

"(1) The plaintiffs, Fred Robertson and W. J. Ratcliff, by virtue of the various conveyances, assignments and certificates executed and delivered to them by the various parties named in the special findings of fact, and by the acts done by them therein stated, have acquired a full and complete title and ownership in and to the land described and are the owners of the same, and are entitled to the possession thereof.

"(2) That as the board of county commissioners of Rawlins county has adopted the provisions of chapter 162, Laws of Kansas 1891, being paragraph 7659 of the General Statutes of the state of Kansas for 1901, and the same...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Jones v. Cook
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 11, 1946
    ...Natl. Bank, 128 S.W. 1147; Johnson v. Norris, 190 F. 459, L.R.A. 1915B, 884; Peoples Natl. Bank v. Maxson, 150 N.W. 601; Robertson v. Howard, 82 Kan. 588, 109 P. 696; Frazier v. Desha, 19 Ky. 407, 40 S.W. Roberts v. Martin, 158 Ky. 154, 164 S.W. 369; Steevens v. Earles, 25 Mich. 40; Hunter ......
  • Sox v. Miracle
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • December 2, 1916
    ... ... 615; Allen v. Cadwell, 55 Mich. 8, ... 20 N.W. 692; Kercheval v. Wood, 3 Mich. 509; How ... Anno. Stat. (Mich.) 5729, 7532; Robertson v. Howard, ... 82 Kan. 588, 109 P. 696; Travis v. Topeka Supply Co ... 42 Kan. 625, 22 P. 991; Poole v. French, 71 Kan. 391, 80 P ... ...
  • Sox v. Miracle
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • December 28, 1916
    ...cases which are at all applicable were decided under peculiar statutes which differ materially from our own. The cases of Robertson v. Howard, 82 Kan. 588, 109 Pac. 697, and Poole v. French, 71 Kan. 391, 80 Pac. 997, merely construed the statutes of Kansas; and those statutes (section 6687,......
  • McNeil v. McNeil
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • December 20, 1922
    ... ... Counsel have cited us to the following cases which hold to ... the same effect: Robertson v. Howard, 82 ... Kan. 588, 109 P. 696; Hutchinson v ... Olberding, 136 Iowa 346, 112 N.W. 647. Nevertheless, ... under statutes like or similar ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT