The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-07-02
FORFEITED TAX SALES.
LETTER OF VITAL INTEREST COM
PILED BY AUDITOR DUNN.

State Auditor Dunn yesterday issued
the following circular to county auditors
throughout the state, directing them as
to the proper mode of procedure in tax
matters as determined by recent decisions
of the supreme court, ~ The Information or, ion
contained in the circular Is Of Vital in
terest, as it bears upon several phases
of tax collections:
In the case of Cole VS.. Lamn, in N.
w. S2s,. our supreme court held that the
owner had the right to redeem from the
forfeited tax sale provided for by chap
ter 800, General Laws 1899, at any time
before the notice of expiration had been
given, provided for by section 1854,
required, for redemption was not in
volved, hence was not determined.
In. the case of Kipp VS.. Johnson de-
cision was given on June 20, 1901, in
which our supreme court held that "the
amount required to redeem from a tax
sale pursuant to chapter 322, General
Laws 1889, is the sum paid at the sale by
the purchaser, with interest, and not
necessarily. the full amount OF taxes,
with interest and costs"
Therefore, in preparing the notice of
expiration, the amount to be stated for
redemption should be the actual amount
paid by the purchaser at the sale, to-
IgetherrHwfth all subsequent delinquent
taxes that may have been paid, with in
terest on all sums paid, as provided by
law. 80 Interest should be computed at
the rate of per cent per month from
the date of the sale, or the time of pay
ment when subsequent taxes have been
paid (Sec. 1873. s.,.r -
Please note that If the amount of sale
is greater than, the Judgment. no interest
Should be recl1ored on the excess.
Having arrived at the amount that can
be accepted by you for redemption from
the forfeited sale under chapter 1872, Cen
eral Laws 1899, the next question is,
what is to be done with the money SO
paid?
When the amount of sale is less than
the judgment, which is nearly always the
case, it is comparatively easy. The pur.'
chaser gets what he has paid, with in
terest, and that disposes of 1t. But in
some cases pieces were sold for a sum
in excess of the judgment. In such cases
you must likewise require the original
owner to pay the full amount for which
the tract was sold, together with subse-
quent taxes, etc, with interest as stated
above, except interest on the excess paid
at the sale.
The next question is, what becomes of
the excess or surplus paid at the sale?
The owner of-the land is entitled to re-
ceiye, the excess, above the Judgment, for
which his land was sold. (Farnham vs..
Jones, 80 Mimi, p. 7. and opinion of attor-
ney general, Sept. IS, 1880
| When redemption is made in such cases
amount of sale. with interest has been
! paid by the party redeeming, as re-
quired by the decision in Kipp VS.. John
! son.
amount in excess of the Judgment, and
the owner has not redeemed, the excess
should likewise be paid to the owner
Of the land, after his right OF redemp-
! ton has been cut off by the service of
! the notice of expiration under Sec 1854.
! Notice of expiration of redemption ex-
! pires sixty days from the date of the fill
! ing of the proof CT the service of the
I notice in the office of the county audi
| tori In some instances the owner of the
/ land may acquire the interest of the tax
! purchaser by an assignment Of the tax
certificate. Such cases should be treated
the same as If redemption had actually
! been made. Your records should show
! a redemption by the owner. refundment
to him as the assignee of the tax pur-
| chaser, and payment to him of the ex.
cess or surplus, for which the tract was
sold at the sale, If an excess was paid.
The county auditor must satisfy him
! self beyong any .peradventure or doubt
that the excess is paid to the rightful
! owner, and in order to protect himself
should require applicants to furnish him
with proof Of title.
This circular has been issued in re-
| Spouse to numerous inquiries, and has
been approved by Attorney General
| Douglas. r G Dunn