Case ID: ohio_5/html/0298-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court :", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jonathan Rawson v. Gains Boughton. Ezekiel A. Turner v. Gains Boughton.
    On application to redeem lands sold for taxes, if judges of the common pleas are disqualified from sitting, case may be certified to the Supreme Court.
    These two cases, involving the same principle, were adjourned here for decision from the county of Lorain.- In each case, the plaintiff petitioned the court of common pleas to redeem lands sold for taxes and purchased by the defendant. One of the judges of the court of common pleas was interested in the subject matter of the petitions; the president-judge had been of counsel for one of the parties in the matter in litigation. These facts being known to the judges of the common pleas, they certified the cause to the Supreme Court, for decision, under the provisions of section 63 of the act to regulate the practice of the judicial courts. In the Supreme Court a motion was made to dismiss the cases, for defect of jurisdiction, the decision of which motion was reserved, and adjourned.
    No counsel appeared on either side.
   By the Court :

The application to redeem lands sold for taxes is to be made to-the court of common pleas of the county where the lands lie. Notice of this application is to be given in the newspapers, specifying its object, and describing the land proposed to be redeemed. The court are required to examine the facts set forth touching the applicant’s right to redeem, and “the counter testimony of the adverse party, if any be offered.” Upon this examination the court are required, by law, if satisfied that the applicant is entitled to-redeem, “to make an order of redemption,” to “award restitution, of the premises, and direct that the applicant shall pay the costs of the application.” The proceeding is clearly contemplated to-be an adversary litigation between adverse parties. It must, consequently, be in the nature of a 11 suit or action,” and .comes fairly within the terms of the law under which the causes are certified to us. The case is one within *the inconvenience intended to-be provided for, as well as within the letter of the statute. W& would rather prefer to aid the full administration of justice by a. liberal construction of the terms used, than to adopt a strained one to divest ourselves of jurisdiction. It is therefore decided to retain the cases for final adjudication, that the party may not be-deprived of the remedy which the law contemplated, to afford him.