Steele v. Murry

Decision Date28 May 1890
Citation45 N.W. 1030,80 Iowa 336
PartiesSTEELE v. MURRY ET AL.
CourtIowa Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from district court, Cass county; N. W. MACY, Judge.

Action in chancery to enjoin the treasurer of the county from issuing a tax-deed, and the purchaser from receiving it, on account of irregularities in the tax proceeding and insufficiency of the notice of the expiration of the time for redemption. There was a decree granting the relief prayed for by plaintiff. Defendant appeals.L. L. Delano, J. W. Scott, and D. F. Harding, for appellants.

Phelps & Temple, for appellee.

BECK, J.

1. The main objections made by plaintiff to the tax-title involved in this action are (1) that the taxes for the years wherein preceding taxes became delinquent were not entered upon the tax-book, as required by Code, § 845; (2) that the notice of the expiration of the time for redemption required by Id. § 894, was not given. We will waive the consideration of the first objection, as the second, in our opinion, is decisive of the case, and it is probable we would not unite in the same views upon the facts of the case involved in this question. The second objection, therefore, alone demands consideration. Section 894 contains this provision: “After the expiration of two years and nine months after the date of sale of the land for taxes, the lawful holder of the certificate of purchase may cause to be served upon the person in possession of such land or town lot, and also upon the person in whose name the same is taxed, if such person resides in the county where such land is situated, in the manner provided by law for the service of original notices, a notice signed by him, his agent or attorney, stating the date of sale, and the description of the land or town lot sold, the name of the purchaser, that the right of redemption will expire, and a deed for said land be made, unless redemption for such sale be made within ninety days from the completed service thereof. Service may be made upon non-residents of the county by publishing the same three times in some newspaper printed in said county, and, if no newspaper is printed in said county, then in the nearest newspaper published in this state.”

The notice contemplated in this section is to be served upon the person in possession of the land. What is the notice which is to be served upon him? The word “notice,” used in the language of the statute above quoted, means a written paper containing the statements or...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Plumb v. City of Grand Rapids
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • 13 d5 Junho d5 1890
  • Woodruff & Son v. Rhoton
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • 8 d2 Março d2 1960
    ...did not require that the lienholder be told in the notice of the time limit. It is not such a statute as appeared in Steele v. Murry, 80 Iowa 336, 45 N.W. 1030, cited by appellants, where the statute set out what was to be 'stated' in the Where, as here, the language of the statute is plain......
  • Rector & Wilhelmy Co. v. Maloney
    • United States
    • South Dakota Supreme Court
    • 31 d2 Dezembro d2 1901
    ...It is our conclusion that the notice was not sufficient, and the right of redemption was not, therefore, cut off.” Steele v. Murry (Iowa), 45 N.W. 1030. The statutory expression, “And had been duly assessed and properly charged on the tax books or duplicate for the year …” (of the assessmen......
  • Steele v. Murry
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • 28 d3 Maio d3 1890

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT