State ex rel. And To Use of Jennings v. Hamilton

• Citation: 293 S.W. 378
• Decision Date: 11 April 1927
• Docket Number: 25475
• Parties: STATE ex rel. and to Use of JENNINGS, Internal Revenue Collector, v. HAMILTON et al
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri

293 S.W. 378

STATE ex rel. and to Use of JENNINGS, Internal Revenue Collector, v. HAMILTON et al

No. 25475

Supreme Court of Missouri, First Division

April 11, 1927

Fred & Gilbert Lamb, of Salisbury, for appellants.

T. P Schooler, of Salisbury, for respondent.

OPINION

GANTT J.

This is a suit for delinquent taxes alleged to be due the city of Salisbury, Chariton county, for the years 1918, 1919, 1920 1921, and 1922, and to enforce a lien against the land. Judgment was for the plaintiff for $ 37.83, and defendant has appealed. Plaintiff introduced in evidence the tax bill. The land is described in the tax bill and judgment as follows:

'Beginning at a point 64 feet north of the southwest corner of lot 2, in the northern division of the city of Salsby, as shown on the map of said city by Edwards Bros.' atlas, 1876, from said point run east a distance of 173 feet, thence north a distance of 63 feet, thence west 173 feet, then south 63 feet to the point of beginning, all in the N. E. N. E. of Sec. 3 Tp. 53, R. 17.'

Evidence for the defendant is as follows: H. B. Richardson testified that he was an abstracter, residing in the city of Keytesville and Chariton county; that he had examined the records in the office of the recorder of deeds and found no record of a plat of the northern division of the city of Salisbury, and there never was one on file; that the paper exhibited to him purported to be a plat of the city of Salisbury and it designates a northern, southern, and southwestern division of the city of Salisbury; that the paper was torn out of an old atlas, made by Edwards Bros. in 1976; that he tore the paper out of the atlas and gave it to the attorney for the plaintiff; that the paper is a copy of the Edwards' atlas, and is only a printed page out of a county atlas. It was not acknowledged and filed in the office of the recorder of deeds.

Mary O. West testified that she was deputy recorder of Chariton county; that she had examined the records in the recorder's office and found no plat of the northern division of the city of Salisbury on file.

It was agreed that the description of the land in the assessment roll of the assessor of Salisbury township, Chariton county, for the years 1917, 1918, 1919, 1920, and 1921, was identical with the description of the land in the tax bill.

Appellant contends that the description of the land in the assessment roll and tax bill is indefinite, uncertain, and insufficient to support a judgment.

By the statute 'the land list' and the assessor's 'real estate book' shall contain all lands subject to assessment, with an accurate description, arranged in numerical order of range, township, section and parts of sections, lots or parcels, by the least legal subdivisions when sections are so divided into parts, lots, or parcels; and all lots or parcels of lands in cities, towns, and villages shall be arranged according to the number of block, lot or parcel. * * * Sections 12790 and 12792, R. S. 1919. It is also provided by statute that whenever any city, town, or...