State ex rel. Reed v. Elliott

• Decision Date: 06 November 1905
• Citation: 114 Mo. App. 562,90 S.W. 122
• Parties: STATE ex rel. REED v. ELLIOTT et al.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

90 S.W. 122

114 Mo. App. 562

STATE ex rel. REED v. ELLIOTT et al.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

November 6, 1905.

1. EXECUTION—SALES—VACATION—INADEQUACY OF PRICE.

Mere inadequacy of price does not justify setting aside a sheriff's sale of land under a proper judgment, unless the inadequacy is such as to shock the moral sense.

2. TAXATION—SALE—VACATION—INADEQUACY OF PRICE.

Inasmuch as under the statutes a valid and regular sale under valid and regular proceedings and judgment for taxes divests title, courts will apply to tax sales the rule that inadequacy of price will justify setting aside a sale under a proper judgment, if the inadequacy is such as to shock the moral sense.

3. SAME—IRREGULARITIES.

Inasmuch as under the statute a valid sale for taxes under valid and regular proceeding and judgment divests title, the conclusiveness justifies the courts in giving heed to irregularities and permitting them to influence the determination of an attack upon the sale.

4. SAME—SALE—QUANTITY OF LAND TO BE SOLD.

Under the statute of 1899, on a sale of land for taxes, the sheriff is only authorized to sell so much of the land as will satisfy the judgment.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jasper County; J. D. Perkins, Judge.

Proceeding by the state, on the relation of one Reed, against C. E. Elliott and others to set aside an execution sale on a judgment for taxes. From a judgment overruling the motion, defendants appeal. Reversed.

See 79 S. W. 696.

Howard Gray and Thomas & Hackney, for appellants. Geo. E. Booth, E. O. Brown, and Geo. W. Crowder, for respondent.

ELLISON, J.

This proceeding arose on a motion to set aside an execution sale on a judgment for taxes amounting to $22.43 and costs of $16.69. It has been certified to this court by the Supreme Court. The motion was overruled by the trial court. There were some formal defects in the proceedings leading to the judgment and in the judgment itself; but none of these were of sufficient substance to affect the validity of the judgment, especially under our statute of jeofails. Execution was issued on the judgment and was by the sheriff levied upon 20 acres of land which the evidence shows was worth $200 per acre, or the gross sum of $4,000. The sheriff sold the land in gross for $12.50 and returned the execution, whereupon the motion was made to set the sale aside, as stated.

While it is true that the defects in the judgment were not such as would lead the court to set it aside and were such as could readily have been amended, yet they are of importance in this case, since they may well have induced, or at least contributed to, the extraordinary result of $4,000 worth of property selling...