State ex rel. Rice v. Smith
Supreme Court of Minnesota
The relator appeals from an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Stearns, J., presiding, quashing an alternative writ of mandamus.
Read the full summary
The relator appeals from an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Stearns, J., presiding, quashing an alternative writ of mandamus. The writ required the respondent, who is county auditor, to show cause why he should not certify to the amount due upon the redemption of certain land which had been sold under tax judgments in the years 1881 and 1882 for the taxes of 1880 and 1881, it appearing that the relator was the owner of the property, except for such tax sales, and that no notice of the expiration of the time of redemption had been given as required by Laws 1877, c. 6. This…
1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.
This appeal is to test the constitutionality of chapter 10 of the General Laws of 1881, so far as respects section 22, which in terms declares the repeal of section 37 of chapter 6 of the General Laws of 1877, requiring the service of a notice of the expiration of the period for redemption from tax sales. The appellant claims that this repealing section is ineffectual, because the subject of it is not expressed in the title of the act, in compliance with the constitutional requirement that “no law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title.” Const, art. 4, § 27.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gaston v. MerriamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Tingue v. . Village of Port ChesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
3Cited by24 opinions
- Marston v. HumesWashington Supreme Court · 1891
- Martin v. TylerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
- City of Winona v. School-District, No. 82Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Harland v. Territory, Washington Territory1887
- Binion, Sheriff v. Oklahoma Gas Electric Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.