State ex rel. Knox v. Lockyer

• Decision Date: 18 January 1926
• Docket Number: 25477
• Citation: 106 So. 748,140 Miss. 808
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE ex rel. KNOX, ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. LOCKYER. [*]

106 So. 748

140 Miss. 808

STATE ex rel. KNOX, ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. LOCKYER. ^[*]

No. 25477

Supreme Court of Mississippi

January 18, 1926

Division A

TAXATION. Rural lands forfeited for taxes, though surveyed into lots may be sold by commissioner.

Under Code 1906, section 2916 (Hemingway's Code, section 5251) rural land forfeited for taxes, though surveyed into lots may be sold by state land commissioner; it being valuable only for its, timber, or for pasturage or agriculture.

HON. V. A. GRIFFITH, Chancellor.

APPEAL from chancery court of Harrison county, HON. V. A. GRIFFITH, Chancellor.

Suit by Wilfred S. Lockyer against the state of Mississippi. Decree for complainant, and the state, by Rush H. Knox, attorney-general, appeals. Affirmed.

No brief for the state found in record.

Decree affirmed.

T. M. Evans, for appellee.

The answer filed by the attorney-general admits everything except the right of the state land commissioner to sell the land and issue a patent therefor. The answer asserts title to the property by the reason that said land has been laid off into lots and blocks and platted, and therefore, the state land commissioner had no authority to issue a patent to the same and the patent under which the complainant claims title is null and void. So there is only one question involved.

The attorney-general asserts that Huber v. Freret, 103 So. 3, controls here. This ruling of the court seemed to have been based on the previous statement found in the decision, to-wit: "It is a matter of common knowledge, of which the court will take judicial notice, that urban business property is not ordinarily sold by the acre at a price of so much per acre, but is sold in lots and blocks and parts of lots and blocks, described by metes and bounds in feet and inches; and that such property located in a thriving municipality on one of its main business thoroughfares, is worth very largely more than rural timber, agricultural or pasture lands. To authorize the valuation and sale of such lands the same regulations as govern the valuation and sale of rural timber, agricultural or pasture lands, we think, would be unwise and unreasonable. We hold, therefore, that there was no authority of law for the execution of the patent involved in this case."

We submit that the fact that land has been laid off in lots and blocks for convenience of description would not transform rural land, such as is commonly used for timber and pasture and agricultural purposes into urban property, and, therefore, the state land commissioner and the Governor had the same right to issue patents to land of this character, described by lots and blocks as if it had been described by acreage.

It would be a wise piece of legislation to require all land sold by the acre or described otherwise by metes and bounds, in less than government subdivisions, to be platted into lots and blocks and the plat placed on record, since it is almost impossible to assess acreage described by metes and bounds on assessment rolls with a sufficient definiteness to convey title. This being the only question raised, we submit that the decree of the chancery court confirming the title of Wilfred S. Lockyer should be affirmed.

Argued orally by T. M. Evans, for appellee.

OPINION

COOK, J.

This is a proceeding to confirm appellee's title to lots one to thirty, inclusive, of block 3, of the West Seashore subdivision of section twenty-two, township eight south, range twelve west, Harrison county, Miss., containing approximately three and three-tenths acres.

The bill of complaint averred that prior to September 22, 1924 these lands were duly and legally sold to the state of Mississippi for taxes due and unpaid; that on said date the state, acting through the state land commissioner, executed its patent conveying said land to George R. Smith for the consideration of twenty-one dollars and seventy-five cents, and thereafter the said George R. Smith, by warranty deed, conveyed the land to the appellee. The bill further averred that, while said land was laid off in lots and blocks as city property is...