Case Name: In re SEIM
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1903-06-22
Citations: 111 La. 554
Docket Number: No. 14,691
Parties: In re SEIM.
Judges: NIOHOLLS, C. J., and MONROE, J., concur in the decree.
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 111
Pages: 553–561

Head Matter:
(35 South. 744.)
No. 14,691.
In re SEIM.
(June 22, 1903.)
APPEAL—DISMISSAL—RES JUDICATA—TAX TITLE-CANCELLATION OF TAXES—PRESCRIPTION—ACTION TO ANNUL TAX SALE.
On Motion to Dismiss.
1. It not appearing that the evidence called for by defendant had been by her offered in evidence, the appeal will not be dismissed on the ground that it had not been copied in the transcript.
On the Merits.
2. The officers of the tax collecting department had accepted the action of the court canceling the tax as final, and the plaintiff was not iñ a position to buy a claim which, under the court’s action, had no basis upon which to stand.
Blanchard and Provosty, JJ., dissenting.
On Rehearing.
3. The prescription or bar of three years to suits to annul tax sales, provided by article 233 of the Constitution of 1808, does not apply where the property remains in the actual or corporeal possession of the tax debtor or original owner, the purchaser at the tax sale making no effort to dispossess him.
4. Under such a state of facts, an action to confirm the tax title under the provisions of Act No. 101, p. 127, of 1808, is not maintainable.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal from Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans; John St. Paul, Judge.
In the matter of August Seim, praying for confirmation of title. Judgment for defendants Azelie Handlin and Yalsin Jones, and plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Henry L. Garland, Jr., for appellant. William W. Handlin and Joseph Brewer, for appellee Mrs. Azelie Handlin. Emile Pomes, for appellee Yalsin Jones.

Opinion:
BREAUX, J.
Defendant and appellee Mrs. Azelie I-Iandlin moves to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the transcript of appeal is incomplete, in that it does not contain the evidence in another cause numbered 66,202, civil district court, Division A, entitled Mrs. Azelie Handlin v. John C. Dodt et al., which was admitted at her instance, as made to appear from the note of evidence,
Furthermore, that the transcript of appeal does not contain any mention of the fact that August Seim was summoned as a witness in the cause numbered GO,202, civil district court, which is No. 14,619 of the docket of this court. 110 La. 936, 34 South. 881.
Defendant and appellant in the case before us offered record 66,202, entitled Handlin v. Dodt, "with all of the pleadings and all the evidence therein." The pleadings include all formal allegations by the pariles in which they set up their claims and defenses. In offering the "pleadings" it did not embrace the summons in the case issued to witnesses.
The "evidence" introduced in suit No. 66,-202, civil district court (No. 14,619 of this court) does not cover the summons, and in offering the "evidence" in the case the offer did not include the summons, which defendant says should have been copied as forming part of the transcript of appeal.
We do not think the transcript is incomplete without it; that is, without the copy of the summons showing that Seim had been summoned as a witness. Under the circumstances, therefore, we must decline to dismiss the appeal. The summons should have been specially offered in evidence; then it would have formed part of the record.
The motion to dismiss the appeal is overruled.