Stevens v. Doohen
Decision Date | 28 July 1908 |
Citation | 96 P. 1032,50 Wash. 145 |
Parties | STEVENS et al. v. DOOHEN et al. |
Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Pierce County; M. L. Clifford, Judge.
Action by Edwin A. Stevens and others against John Doohen and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
McCormick & Lyle and Charles A. Murray, for appellants.
Boyle Warburton, Quick & Brockway, and Walter M. Harvey, for respondents.
This action was brought by the appellants to set aside a tax deed to quiet title, and to obtain possession of lot 23 in block 1707 in the city of Tacoma. It appears that the appellant A E. Stevens and wife acquired this lot in the year 1888. They paid no taxes on the lot after the year 1895. The taxes became delinquent for the year 1896 and subsequent years. On May 13, 1901, respondent John Doohen purchased a certificate of tax delinquency against the lot. Thereafter, in July of 1901, he brought an action to foreclose this certificate for taxes and interest amounting to $410.82. A summons describing lot 22 in the same block, was served upon the county treasurer, and a copy was published four successive weeks in the Tacoma New Herald. This summons was then changed, so as to describe lot 23, and was published three successive weeks in the same paper. The last publication was made on September 7, 1901. On that date the publisher of the paper made an affidavit that the summons describing lot 23 was published seven successive weeks, from July 20 to September 7, 1901. On July 18, 1901, an application was made for judgment. In this application the lot was described as lot 22, block 1707. On September 23, 1901, an order of default was entered, and on the same day a judgment was entered, which recites the following: Then follows a tabulated statement of the taxes, interest, and costs itemized for the different years, and a description of the property, as 'lot 22, block 1707, map of Tacoma.' The decree concludes with an order upon the treasurer to sell 'the premises hereinbefore mentioned.' The county treasurer, pursuant to this order, sold lot 23, block 1707, in October, 1901, and John Doohen became the purchaser for the amount of the judgment. It is stipulated that the lot at that time was worth $450. Mr. Doohen took possession of the lot, and made certain...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Booth v. Cooper
... ... Platt, 76 Kan. 636, 92 P. 705; Bacon v. Rice, ... 14 Idaho 107, 93 P. 511; Best v. Wohlford, 153 Cal ... 17, 94 P. 98; Stevens v. Doohen, 50 Wash. 145, 96 P ... 1032; Glenn v. Stewart, 78 Kan. 605, 97 P. 863; ... Abel v. Swain, 12 Ariz. 421, 100 P. 831; ... Halbouer v ... ...
-
Dearing v. City of Port Neches, 2465.
...The trial court held that this omission was clearly a clerical error and, therefore, not destructive of the judgment. Stevens v. Doohen, 50 Wash. 145, 96 P. 1032, fully sustains this conclusion. In that case the judgment first described the property as "Lot 23," block 1707, and ascertained ......
- Warwick v. Hitchings
-
Hembree v. McFarland
...of laches, and for that reason could not maintain the action. This ruling was based upon the decision in the case of Stevens v. Doohen, 50 Wash. 145, 96 P. 1032. In case we said: 'There are facts in the record which tend strongly to show laches, but we shall not consider these facts because......