Little Falls herald. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1889-1950, 1901-02-01
lfEDffm g IN Al. SAIL.
Jsdse lewis Decislea On al ls,rert-
ant Point u ! Tax
Title Sale.

s.. Paul Dispatch: Judge Lewis
lete saturda filed 8 decision which
has has ben a1nixious!y awaited BY county
auditors through the state. ~ deal
ers in tax titles, real estate owners.
as affecting their official and private
interests respectively '..S. ( 5z.
The title Of the case is that Of the
State ex rel. Sylvester. Kipp and Or
rim Kipp. against William r. John
son. county auditor Of Ramsey coun-
ty, Minnesota. s.. i.
!s The proceeding here is BY the owE-
er OF land to compel the auditor OF
Ramsey county to certify the
amount due and necessary to re-
deem from tax sale thereof by the
state to an ACTUAL purchaser.
The sole question presented is
what amount the certificate should
show as due and necessary for the
owner to pay in order to redeem
from this sale. .s$s=.zE II. +. .|zf .zx
Under the, provisions oi the clear
ance sale act ''no land shall be sold
for any sum less than SO per centum
OF the original taxes due thereon. 2
and the land in question was in fact
sold to an actual purchaser, under
this statute, for so per cent Of the
taxes due thereon.
The clearance sale act contained
no provision allowing redemption
after sale. But the supreme court,
in the case OF Cole against Lamm,
held that the general provisions OF
law with respect to redemptionfound
in our statutes control this act. and
that all sales hereunder we're made
subject to the landowners right to
redeem within sixty days after no.
tice Of redemption is given and filed.
This relatcr, as owner, lis a person
under.the law having q right to re-
deem from this sale: ... ..s, ..sss's.S 5=
The argument before judge Lewis
turned on this question Of the
l,,s'nnt q \ q M. hstll.
eronthe one hand as claimed by
the relator, the owner could redeem
by paying the amount paid by the
purchaser at the sale, or whether oa
the other hand, he must, as held by
the attorney general, pay the entire
amount due the state. .s.,~ Z
Judge Lewis, after careful review
OF every consideration suggested by
counsel, and q critical examination
of the provisions of the statutes re-
lating totax sales and tax titles,
finds that the owner: may redeem by
paying what the, purchaser paid at
the sale, and that he need not pay
the entire amount due the state. ~
He.must. of course, be held to pay
interest at IL per cent. s,..s ,::z.=:s s =:..
Redemption, says Judge Lewis, in
conclusion, is the taking back of
property upon the terms or condi-
tions on which it was conveyed-in
this case the purchase price--an d
concerns only the owner aud pur-
chaser and involY solely the land
and the purchase price.
Redemption is accomplished
through the>agency OF the officers Of
the state whom the law designa tes
70 insure the rights OF the parties,
bot the state is not q party in inter
est and can neither lose nor gain
thereby
s This is a redemption from a tax
sale as said in Cole against Lam III,
and is not q redemption from tax
lien.
In my opinion the purchase price
at such a sale, with Interest t, deter
mines the amount necessary to re-,
deem sz=.ss
The work .of. cleaning away at the
paper mill is abouu done and work
t,orrir =, ,,,r,x., ~,