Sherrill v. Faulkner
| Decision Date | 08 July 1940 |
| Docket Number | 4-6029 |
| Citation | Sherrill v. Faulkner, 142 S.W.2d 229, 200 Ark. 1006 (Ark. 1940) |
| Parties | SHERRILL v. FAULKNER |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Jackson Chancery Court; A. S. Irby, Chancellor reversed.
Decree reversed and cause remanded.
John Sherrill and Frank Wills, for appellant.
Richardson & Richardson, for appellee.
Appellants are trustees for the former stockholders of the Loy E. Rast Seed Company, a corporation under the laws of this state whose charter was revoked by proclamation of the Governor on March 28, 1934.It was dissolved by resolution of the stockholders and directors in March, 1938, and its assets conveyed to appellants as trustees for liquidation.The corporation was the owner of 80 acres of land in Jackson county, described as the west half of the northwest quarter of section 5, township 12 north, range 2 west.This land was forfeited and sold to the state for the non-payment of taxes thereon for 1934.On February 23, 1938, the Attorney General caused suit to be filed against this and other lands in the Jackson chancery court to confirm the state's title.On May 22, 1938, a confirmation decree was rendered, but not entered until June 22, 1938, in which it was found that the NW NW of said land was forfeited for the non- payment of taxes amounting to $ 3.01 and that the SW NW was forfeited for the nonpayment of taxes amounting to $ 2.20 for the Year 1934; that the redemption period had expired; and that the state is the owner of said lands.On November 9, 1938, the state sold and conveyed said land to appellee, R. L Faulkner.
In April, 1939, well within the one year allowed by § 9 of act 119 of the Acts of 1935, § 8719, Pope's Digest appellants intervened in said confirmation suit, making appelleesparties, in which they alleged their ownership as such trustees, their lack of knowledge of such suit and a meritorious defense thereto as follows: "that the purported forfeiture and sale of said lands for non-payment of 1934 taxes was void in that the taxes for which said lands were sold included levies of 1/10 mill for the Crippled Children's Commission, 1/10 mill for the Crippled Children's Home and Hospital and 5/10 mill for the Farm Agent, Home Agent and County Health Unit, which levies were void and in violation of the State Constitution, the five mill limit for county general purposes having already been levied."They further alleged that the deed from the State to appellees constitutes a cloud on their title; that they have tendered to Faulkner the amount of money paid by him to the State Land Commissioner for his deed, and all taxes subsequently paid by him, with interest which was refused; that the total tax, penalty and cost lawfully due on said land was $ 5.19 instead of $ 5.21; and that they now tender to the clerk of the court said $ 5.19 with such additional taxes as would have accrued had the lands been on the tax books since 1934, with interest.Prayer was that such amount be determined, that their title be quieted on their paying into the registry of the court said amount, with penalty and interest and that appellees' deed by canceled.
Appellees filed a general demurrer to the intervention and an answer consisting of a general denial, specifically denying a tender, and admitting their deed from the state of November 9, 1938.Trial resulted in a decree dismissing the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Lumsden v. Erstine
... ... Davidson, 199 Ark. 276, 133 S.W.2d 442; ... Redfern v. Dalton, 201 Ark. 359, 144 S.W.2d ... 713; Faulkner v. Binns. Trustee, 202 Ark. 457, 151 ... S.W.2d 101 ... In the ... case at bar we are considering an attack made more than one ... Fuller v. Wilkinson, 198 Ark. 102, 128 ... S.W.2d 251; Smart v. Alexander, 201 Ark ... 211, 144 S.W.2d 25; Sherrill v. Faulkner, ... 200 Ark. 1006, 142 S.W.2d 229 ... III. If ... the property is not subject to taxation, then there is no ... ...
-
Foster v. Jefferson County Quorum Court
...Constitution have all been cases which touch and concern property taxes and no other means of taxation. See, e.g., Sherrill v. Faulkner, 200 Ark. 1006, 142 S.W.2d 229 (1940); Gaither v. Gage & Co., 82 Ark. 51, 100 S.W. 80 (1907); Doniphan Lumber Co. v. Reid, 82 Ark. 31, 100 S.W. 69 (1907); ......
-
Plant v. Johnson
... ... v. Wilkinson, 198 Ark. 102, 128 S.W.2d 251; ... Smart v. Alexander, 201 Ark. 211, 144 ... S.W.2d 25; Sherrill v. Faulkner, 200 Ark ... 1006, 142 S.W.2d 229." ... (c) ... The Confirmation Decree Could Not Cure the Void ... Sale ... ...
-
Schuman v. Walthour
... ... existed for the levy of the pension tax in addition to the 5 ... mills for city purposes, and in the case of Sherrill ... v. Faulkner, 200 Ark. 1006, 142 S.W.2d 229, it was ... held that a sale for taxes, including an excessive tax, was ... void, [204 Ark. 636] ... ...