St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-07-22
MISTAKES OF OFFICIALS
WILL NOT RELEASE TAXPAYERS or;
OBLIGATION TO PAR,
SAYS THE SUPREME COURT.
Text of n Ruling on Case of
Great Public Interest-John ID.
Moran Wins His Suit Against
the City-Duluth's Council is
UpheId-Minor Decisions.


the City-Duluth's Council is
UpheId-Minor Decisions.
Justice Collins. of the supreme court,
yesterday filed a decision in the cause
of Elizabeth B. Croswell, respondent,
against Christiana h. Benton and
others, appellants, and the order of the
court below was reversed.
This was all action in ejectment, In
which defendants had verdict. The
appeal was taken from the order grant
Ing new trial because the court below
was of the opinion that it erred when
charging the jury. The plaintiff was
the owner OF the property i'll question
unless his title had been Invested in
proceedings under the General Laws OF
1881, an act to enforce the payment of
taxes which became delinquent, and the
regularity of the sale of the premises TO
defendants predecessors i'll interest
under that act is not questioned except
In certain qualifications.
1t IS shown that the tax for 1875 be-
came delinquent For some reason the
county auditor took no steps to collect
until September, 1881, when he placed
the property on the delinquent list, and
the sale was had. 1t appears that on
June il, 1877, the plaintiff applied to
The county auditor for statement of
all the taxes, and the auditor complying
fixed certain sum as due and unpaid.
but the blank was imperfectly filled
put, and it did not appear for what
years. The sum specified was paid
upon the superstition that it covered all,
but the fact remained that the taxes for
1875 were not included.
The supreme court holds that the |
owner had the right 10 redeem by pay
ing the amount due.
The Syllabus,
which follows, gives an exposition of |
the position of the appellate court:
FirSt-When taxes upon real property |
are merely delinquent and no judgment |
has been obtained against the same and |!
no sale has been made, payment of the |
amount certified by the county auditor |
to be due and delinquent for taxes and |
tax liens to the county treasurer will |
not have the effect of diScharging the |
land from all taxes in case OF failure |
through mistake of the auditOr-to |
pay all that is actually due.
Second-The facts in the case diStIn |
guished from those considered in Forest |
VS.. Henry, SO Mimi, 434.
Third-Ihe title and the various pro- |
visions of General Laws 1881, chapter |
135, clearly indicate that it applied to |
all lands which had become delinquent |
for nOn-paynent of taxes prior to the |
year 1879, and not solely to lands which |
had been forfeited to the state prior TO |
that year.
Albert C. Whitney, appellant, vs.. Frank |
Wegler, respondent Order affirmed.
GILFILLAN, Z. j.
Syllabus-The limitation of Laws |
1881, chapter 1875, section twas Intended |
to operate as conf ming the tax sale |
with certain exceptions and the right |
acquired under It, AS such it was I'M
constitutional. And the repeal in Laws |
1887, chapter 127. section l, cannot af-
feet 1T. Certain objections to the JuriS
diction OF the court in proceedings I'M |
der chapter 135 considered and held un-
founded.
Moran Wins His Suit
John d. Moran, respondent, VS.. City of St
Paul, appellant. Order affirmed,
COLLINS, j.
Syllabus-FirSt-The provisions of
the charter of st. Paul requiring notice
to be served on the mayor or clerk of
claims for injuries received from "a de-
feet in the condition of any bridge,
street, sidewalk or thGroughfare" ap-
plies only to injuries resulting from de-
fectS in public ways as such, and with
regard to their usefulness and safety
Tor the purposes of travel.
Second When it is alleged In an ac-
ton against the city that the-defectlve
water main or pipe which caused the
injury was laid in the street by the city
itself, the complaint is not demurrable
for defect Of parties defendant, be-
cause the board of water commissioners
was not Joined as defendant.
Assignment of Insurance.
Charles Il. Maxey, respondent VS. New
Hampshire Fire Insurance Company of
Manchester, appellant Order overrulirg
defendonts demurrer affirmed.
COLLINS. ].
Syllabus-FirSt--A fire insurance policy
by the terms of which the loss, if any, is
made payable to mortgage as his in
terest, may appear, is contract for the
benefit of such mortgagee; and he, or a
person to whom he has assigned the
claim after a cause of action has ac-
crued, is entitled to recover in his own
name the full amount of the insurance,
II the same does not exceed the amount
due upon the mortgage.
Second-When in such an action il is
alleged in the complaint that the mort
gage has sustained loss and damage in
certain amount. 1t is, as against a gen.
eral demurrer, sufficiently alleged that
the insured owner has sustained loss
and damage. And under such an allie
cation the value of the property de-
Stroyed may be shown upon the trial.
Duluth Council Upheld.
James W. Norton. appellant, vs. City of Du-
Il ont nr6a
COLLINS, j.
misunderstanding, for the purposes
of this case, that such of the provisions
of General Laws, 1893, ch. SO, an act
defining what shall constitute newspa-
per for the publication of the laws of the
state and legal notices, as We're incon-
SlStent with certain charter provisions
OF the city of Duluth, had superseded
the same and should have guided and
controlled the city council when it
designated an official paper on the oath
day of April, 1893, it is held that the
action of such council on that day in
awarding the contract for the official
printing to the proprietor and publisher
of a newspaper called 1.-The Common
wealth" and in designating that paper
as the official paper of the city for the
then ensuing year, was proper and valid
Law of Attachment.
David E. Jones and William II. Bacmbach,
copartners as D. L. Jones d Co., respond
ents. VS.. David Swank, appellant. Judg-
ment affirmed COLLINS j.
yllabus-First-ln an action for the
value of goods, wares and merchandise
sold and delivered, and for services rem
dered and labor performed. a cause OF
action independent of and against
plaintiff for willfully, maliciously and
with injurious intent causing the prop
erty of the former TO be seized and at
tached in value greatly in excess of the
amount claimed TO be due, in attachment
proceedings instituted upon the claims
and causes of action set forth in the
complaint in the present action, and
also for the neglect and misuse OF the
attached property with such intent, is
not defense by way OF coHnter-claims.
Second-DefendanES motion for a