Williams v. Bowers

• Decision Date: 28 February 1908
• Citation: 197 Mass. 565,84 N.E. 317
• Parties: WILLIAMS et al. v. BOWERS et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

197 Mass. 565

84 N.E. 317

WILLIAMS et al. v. BOWERS et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Norfolk.

February 28, 1908

COUNSEL

Roger D. Swaim, for demandants.

Wm. B Orcutt, for tenants.

OPINION

BRALEY J.

The right of the demandants to have the land registered, depends upon the validity of their title, which is derived from a sale of the estate by the collector for nonpayment of taxes. The first and eighth exceptions to the master's report having been waived below, while the second, third and fourth not having been argued, must be considered as waived here and the seventh having been disposed of by the findings of fact, the case is before us on the remaining exceptions. These relate solely to the validity of the collector's notice of sale. By Rev. Laws, c. 13, § 38, 'a substantially accurate description of the several rights lots or divisions' of the land which is to be sold must be set forth, or the notice is invalid. The office of the notice is intended to inform the owner, whether taxed to him, or to an occupant, as well as the public generally, that his estate is to be sold. It should be sufficiently definite to enable him, and those who attend as prospective purchasers, to identify the premises, so that either he may prevent the sale by a payment of the tax, or if a sale takes place, bidders will be attracted, and complete for its purchase. If the formalities of a technical survey are not required, nor will slight misdescriptions invalidate, yet the purpose of the statute plainly is, that with the description as published in hand, the taxpayer, and the bidder alike, from its contents, can substantially locate the land which it is proposed to sell. Alvord v. Collin, 20 Pick. 418, 431; Farnum v. Buffum, 4 Cush. 260, 266. Under Rev. Laws, c. 13, § 41, although the collector was authorized to sell the whole, or such undivided portions of the estate as might be required to satisfy the tax with the costs of collection, yet the right to exercise this statutory power, rested upon a strict compliance with the precedent condition of a sufficient notice. Alexander v. Pitts, 7 Cush. 503, 505. After giving the estimated area, the property is then described as consisting of the whole of one lot, and parts of two other lots, shown on a plan on file in the registry of deeds. But no boundaries or divisional proportions being given of the particular parts of the fractional lots, it is wholly...