Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1911-03-20
SUPREME COURT DECIDES
A NICE POINT ON SERVICE
Title Conveyed by Tax Sale Is Void Because Proper Ser
vice of Complaint and Summons Was Not Made on Min
OS, and Being Minors They Were Not Bound by Adverse
Possession Being Legally Incapable of Asserting Thereto

was SOiilil AiCUB Iudb OlAdLlOu dS-
signed his certificate to the First
National Bank of East Portland; that
on March 13, 1896, the sheriff of
Multnomah county executed and de-
liyered to the bank his official deed
to the property; that thereupon the
bank took possession of the property,
claiming title thereto under the sale
and retained its possession until its
conveyance afterwards mentioned.
The history of the conveyance from
that on until it was finally conveyed
to the defendants, Sophia H. Kloster-
man and Mary G. Mayer, March II
1899, is then recited and it is al
legged that the said possession of
said property by each and all of the
above named corporations and per-
sons was open, notorious, exclusive
and under claim and color Of title and
hostile to all other persons, and was
we'll known during all of said times
to the said M. L. Peck, Elmer Peck
and Lloyd Peck, and was at no time
disputed or questioned by them or any
Of them, but on the contrary the
said NJ, L. Peck Elmer Peck and
Lloyd Peck acquiesced in and con-
sented to said sheriff's sale and said
taking and holding possession there
under, and all the claims and acts of
the persons claiming title under said
sale which are mentioned in this an
swer, until the bringing of the suit
to quiet title mentioned in the COM
plalnt herein" which, it was stipulat-
ed, occurred August 2S 1908. The
defendants further plead that they
and their predecessors have paid
sundry taxes on the premises, setting
out the amounts, and some street
Improvement liens and stated that at
the time of filing the suit to quiet
title there were valid subsisting
street liens on the property aggregat-
ing more than $4,000 which are yet
unpaid. They further state In sub
stance that the rents and profits of
the property are not sufficient to
keep up the necessary repairs; that
the use and occupation of the property
Is of no value; and that at the time
Of the conveyance to plaintiff the
property was not worth more than
$4,000 and subject to the street i'm
provement liens is not now worth
more than $4,000.
The reply admits the execution of
the mortgages and the commence
ment of the suit to foreclose, but de-
MES that the summons was served
upon any of the Pecks. AS to the
matter in the answer tending to
show title by adverse possession up
to the suit to quiet title, It denies
that the adverse possession was
known to or acquiesced in by any of
the Pecks and alleges that Elmer
Peck and Lloyd Peck were both min
ors incapable of consenting to or be-
ing bound by such adverse possess
sion. 1t is stipulated that at the
commencement of the suit to quiet
title as plaintiffs August 2S, 1908,
Lloyd was 12 years and months of
age and Elmer was under the age of
21 years.
This action resulted in a Judgment
In the circuit court in favor of plain
tlff and the defendants appeal
Burnett, j.; In the light Of the
stipulation about the ages of Elmer
Peck and Lloyd Peck the eldest of
them was about 7lh years of age on
April IS, 1894. the date mentioned in
the return OF the sheriff upon the
summons in the foreclosure suit.
Section 90, L, o. L. provides that a
summons shall be served upon a
minor under the age of IA years by
delivering copy thereof, together
with a copy of the complaint, certl-
fed as is therein required, ito such
minor personally, and also to his
father. mother, or guardian, or il
there be none within this state, then
to any person having the care OF con-
troll OF such minor, or with whom he
resides or in whose service he is
employed Section SSS, L. o, L., pro-
vides that when there Is more than
one defendant in the suit, service of
the summons may be made by serv-
inu nnlv nna oo,,x, 80 tho ........ IT.