Case Name: SCHEEN et al. v. HAIN et al.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1915-11-02
Citations: 141 La. 606
Docket Number: No. 21624
Parties: SCHEEN et al. v. HAIN et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 141
Pages: 605–611

Head Matter:
(75 South. 427)
No. 21624.
SCHEEN et al. v. HAIN et al.
(Nov. 2, 1915.
On the Merits, May 14, 1917.)
(Syllabus 6y the Oowrt.)
1. Appeal and Error <@=797(2) — Motion to Dismiss — Time.
A motion to dismiss an appeal on the ground that there was no motion or petition is too late, when it is filed more than three days after the transcript was filed.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 3151, 3152.]
On the Merits.
2. Taxation <&wkey;793 — Tax Title — Action to Confirm.
The plaintiff in an action to confirm a tax title, under the provisions of Act No. 101 of 1888, puts his tax title at issue, and the defendant may urge as a defense to the suit any cause of nullity or illegality of the tax sale.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Taxation, Cent. Dig. § 1575.]
3. Taxation <&wkey;529 —Tax Title —Tax Receipt-Presumption.
Tho law looks with disfavor upon a stale claim of ownership based upon a tax title. When the purchaser at a tax sale, and the latter’s heirs, have allowed more than 30 years to pass without taking or demanding possession, or asserting title to the property purchased, and without paying or offering to pay any taxes upon it, and the original owner and the latter’s heirs have remained in possession of the prop erty continuously, and have paid the taxes on it regularly every year, and the tax collector, the original owner, and the original purchaser at the tax sale have died, and the heirs of the original owner produce a tax receipt dated several days previous to the tax sale, the presumption will be that the date of the tax receipt is correct, notwithstanding a memorandum, written across the face of it, declaring that the property was sold for taxes.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Taxation, Cent. Dig. §§ 982-9S4J
Appeal from Eleventh Judicial District Court, Parish of Red River; W. T. Cunningham, Judge.
Action by Louis Scheen and others against Mrs. W. L. Hain and others, with reconventional demand. Judgment for defendants, dismissing the suit, and plaintiffs appeal.
Affirmed.
Foster, Looney & Wilkinson and Scheen & Blanchard, all of Shreveport, for appellants. Blanchard, Smith & Palmer, of Shreveport, T. W. Nettles, of' Cbushatta, and Alexander & Wilkinson, of Shreveport, for appellees.

Opinion:
On Motion to Dismiss Appeal.
SOMMERVILLE, J.
The motion to dismiss is on the ground that no motion or petition was filed by plaintiff, asking for an appeal. The record was filed September 4, 1915, and the motion to dismiss was filed September 30, 1915. The motion comes too late. C. P. art. 886; Walker v. Sauvinet, 27 La. Ann. 314; Webb v. Keller, 39 La. Ann. 55, 1 South. 423.
The motion to dismiss is denied.