Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1906-05-17

taxes ny township authorities, based
on the assessment roll Of the previous
year, was valid levy. @
- II. A certificate Of sale issued on
a tax sale in 1897, which shows that
one acre was. sold out Of d quarter
section, but does not identity the
particular acre referred to, is void.
II. A tax sale certificate for i a
sale under the present revenue law
need not. be executed under seal. The
omission of a seal is not substantial
departure from the statutory form, be-
cause the county auditor has no Of
fetal seal.
10. Section 1868, Revised Codes, of
1899, construed and held under the
provisions of this section, the failure
of a person affected by the tax sale to
seek relief from irregular tax pro-
ceedings before the tax sale operates
as complete bar to any relief unless
the defect complained of is one or
more of the objections specified in
the section, or is some jurisdictional
defect which it is beyond the power
of the legislature to remedy by a
curative act or bar by a limitation
statute not requiring adverse posses
sion. (Young, j., dissenting.)
IA. In the notice of delinquent tax
sale, which was otherwise sufficient,
the words amount of SALE, appeared
over the column in which were stated
the sums for which each tract was to
be sold. The notice clearly showed
what was intended and the words
were not misleading Held: The
notice was good. .-
Appeal from the district court of
Dickey county; w. S. Lauder, Judge
Newman, spalding & Stambaugh
for appellant.
G. W. Davis and W. F. Mason for
respondent.
Opinion Of the court by Engerud, J.
The case will be remanded for a
new trial on the issue presented by
the first and third defences involving
the sales of 1890 and 1896, respective.
ly. In the event that the defendant
shall establish that he is entitled to
a deed under the sale of 1890 for the
taxes of 1889, judgment will be en-
tered awarding him the title and pos
session OF the property. If the de
PENDANT shall not be able to establish
title under said sale of 1890, then the
/ trial court will render judgment
awarding the title to the plaintiff
subject to the rights OF the defendant
under the certificates ON the sales oi
1900 and 1901, respectively, and his
lien for taxes paid by reason of the
sale of 1896. In the event Of .judg
raent for plaintiff ON the question o,
title, such Judgment should show the
reasons why the tax sales or taxes
as the case may be, are void, in com
pliance with section 1870, Revised
Codes Of 1899, The Judgment is re
! yersed and cause remanded fo,
further proceedings in accordance
with this opinion. The appellant vii!
recover the taxable costs and dis
lbursements of this appeal.
State Finance Co, respondent, VS.
William r.. Beck and svaieria n
Myers, appellants. Il "a.
1. The occasional cutting and re
moval Of hay from unoccupied lands
under permit from one claiming
title adverse to the plaintiffs grantol
is not sufficient to constitute adverse
possession SO as to avoid plaintiffs
deed for maintenance. 9s<. =
4 p. Where two tracts of land are
assessed and taxed as a single traci
the entire tax proceeding is nullity
] 8. Where the same irregularity ap
Ipears on the face Of all the proceed
ings under the Woods Law" (chap
! ter 67, Laws of 1877 the judgment
in that proceeding is void. 3
& A. Where there is an utter absenc.