The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1906-01-13
n K IiTLE CASE
DEOWLu SATURDAY
JUDGE STONE MAKES RaIlIkE or IN.
mREsT ~ LAND OWNEss.
M..oWETIE COUNTY SUIT
Dlgss cof tths lmpO<annt pcsnts "a
lsw wall Probably be Iaken
TO isilghsr CaiEt.

Judge j. xW. Stone, If tbe TSgenty-
fifth jshicial circuit, sitting in the
case df White,vs Shaw, a ,snih mought
in cha1oeryaoscompe geSonyeyGnee OF
a tax title, las, Saturday rnandat down
an opinion deDsTing an snportart point
OF the stabutory tax nothse law. The
decision. In hriof. is thG where land
Is owned by,a snumber q PARTIES in
undivided intecssts each owner has the
right 10 redeonn from ahe bar title
until al the owners have lbeen served
with asstatutory notice. usnd sthe six
months period for redemption has ex-
pired. The dooieion wiz 10 Of gareral
Interest," thpougont the abase. asa sreat
many lands. especially in the upper
peninsuls. are. owned in undivided in
terests, aAd The question decided by
Judge Stone has been a n1ootad cone
among lawyers csr a numbe1 OF pears.
The case In question wac aNiafquaste
county case, noticed on the calendar
at the last term, cf the circuit court.as
Peter White vs., tss1 w. SbaU ct al
Mr.. White, az tw0tthirds 0wIsar Of tke
lands in e0atrogorsy, commenced .auit
20 compel q re-c0nVoyance re from SHAW
OF certain tax titles The record
showed that tax ,rotice war served
r.. q. nh oh aft
tion WA ptad Tbe Remaining one
third interest in the land vns owned
by anohter psEty uper whom DC valid
tax notice had ever basn served More
han two years after the service Of
notice up7n him White claimed the
U9ht to fea hy r1rifirg 81 the
60n nt o'aa 1'ca th aaaH ot tIe
ha 04d ua paili-
~ on 1tn3 rb. th afafe re-
so.s 81 d tm owners bttwe
nl one 81 lheiu 81 cut 3A from The
rlgh. Of redemption, IL following
extracts from Judge stones opinion
show the grounds ON which the case
was decided:
Each parcel of Shese lands was ~
sessed taxed and sold as AZ entirety.
The owners OF the different interests
taxed separately. Tbey had she right
under tho statutes 70 pay on redeem
their sepe rate interests within the time
prescribed by statute. This they did
not do. When the pupchase wal made
AZ the auditor general ,oifive, and the
deeds issued 10 defendant Shaw for the
entirety, none Of the owners OF un-
divided interests could further clam a
right TO redeem, except upon the pay
mont Of the whole sum paid bv Shaw
with 100 per cent additional and the
other gums prescribed by law. Whst
are the lights AID duties of the tar
title Rnrchaserf He must give his
notice not TO hos1sr OF an undivided
interest only, but he must pnoGeed
against the grantee or grantees under
the last recorded deed In the regular
chain OF title. His notice must be
directed to the owner or owners 0f
any and all Interests in the land, etc.
The statute clearly recognizes that
theirs may hs different and divers
grantees and owners 10 be served.
Section i4i clearly gives the right to
any grantee or grantees under the last
recorded deed in the regular chain Of
title. etc. 10 receive "a re-conVeyance
of such interests in such lands ~ held
by the tax title holder npon making
the payment required within the
prescribed time
10 seems very clear that the tax
titlt purchaser cannot SO into possession
ln ua ha s8ryad notice IS ailof tho
gfttea urar Tie aa. recorded deed
and clint unti ha ha thn complied
UIft ll .tuie tao right % Udemp
tion untlns 10 nll of snch grantees
and tlis Is rendered very clear by q
reference 10 Section i4i Any grantee
or grantees under the last recorded deed
in the regular chain OF title. or under
| tax deeds Ssncn lands. or any mort
-es or mortgagees named In undis-
charged recorded mortgages or any
assignee thereof Of record at the time
Of giving Of said notice or any execu.
tor, etc, shall be entitled 10 redeem
upon payment Of the sums specified by
the statute.
''In Pike Va. Richardson. 10 N. w.
Reporter Sos, IL was held that Sections
i40 and f4i should be construed TO-
getner. the period allowed for redemp.
tion being coterninous with the
period during which the holder Of the
tax title may take action, 50 that the !