Sch. Dist. No. 109 of Walsh Cnty. v. Hefta

• Decision Date: 22 January 1917
• Citation: 160 N.W. 1005,35 N.D. 637
• Parties: SCHOOL DIST. NO. 109 OF WALSH COUNTY v. HEFTA.
• Court: North Dakota Supreme Court

35 N.D. 637

160 N.W. 1005

SCHOOL DIST. NO. 109 OF WALSH COUNTY

v.HEFTA.

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

Jan. 15, 1917.

On Petition for Rehearing, Jan. 22, 1917.

Syllabus by the Court.

On approval of a contract for the sale of school land, the purchaser obtains a title subject to transfer by deed and by execution sale and subject to taxation and to adverse possession.

Appeal from District Court, Walsh County; W. J. Kneeshaw, Judge.

Action by School District No. 109 of Walsh County, N. D., against Peter Hefta. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.Frank B. Feetham, of Grand Forks, for appellant. H. C. De Puy, of Grafton, for respondent.

ROBINSON, J.

The plaintiff school district brings this action to quiet title to two acres of land in a corner of the N. E. 1/4 of section 36, township 156, range 52. The complaint simply avers that the plaintiff owns the two acres, and that the defendants claim some title or interest in it adverse to the plaintiff. Such a complaint is a mere challenge to the defendant to make a counter complaint and to set forth his claim or abandon it. The answer of Peter Hefta is dated January 3, 1913, and it is the commencement of an action by Peter Hefta to establish his title to the land in question. By its reply the plaintiff claims title by an adverse possession of 20 years prior to January 3, 1913; and the proof of such adverse possession is conclusive. In 1891 Anton Hefta purchased the land, and the sale to him was duly confirmed by the board of university and school lands. From the date of approval the land was subject to taxation; it was subject to transfer by defendant and by execution sale, subject only to the balance, if any, that might be due on the contract. It was for all purposes the land of the purchaser, the same as if he had taken a deed and given back a mortgage for the balance of the purchase price. At the end of 20 years, when payment was made, a patent for the land was duly issued to Anton Hefta, who transferred his title to his son, Peter Hefta. For more than 20 years prior to January 3, 1913, both defendants lived within half a mile of the schoolhouse and on the land in question, and never in any way challenged the adverse possession. The claim of defendant is that the statute giving a title by adverse possession of 20 years does not apply to school land prior to the issuing of a patent for the same. By statute school lands are sold on these terms: The purchaser pays...