Harper v. City of Conway Springs
Court of Appeals of Kansas
Error from Sumner district court; J. A. Burnette, judge. STATEMENT. In this action the plaintiff in error, as plaintiff, sought to recover from the defendants in error four lots in the city of Conway Springs. The plaintiff claimed under a tax deed issued by the county clerk of Sumner county, and based upon a tax sale made for the taxes of the year'1888. The defendants, answered, admitting their possession of the premises and denying all other allegations of the petition.
Read the full summary
Error from Sumner district court; J. A. Burnette, judge. STATEMENT. In this action the plaintiff in error, as plaintiff, sought to recover from the defendants in error four lots in the city of Conway Springs. The plaintiff claimed under a tax deed issued by the county clerk of Sumner county, and based upon a tax sale made for the taxes of the year'1888. The defendants, answered, admitting their possession of the premises and denying all other allegations of the petition. The final trial resulted in a judgment in favor of the defendants, the court holding the tax deed void. Findings of fact…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Milton, J. :
“By paragraph 6948 of the General Statutes of 1889, it is made the duty of the state board of equalization to apportion the amount of the taxes for state purposes among the several counties, in proportion to the valuation of the taxable property therein, and paragraph 6930 makes it the duty of the county clerk in each county to determine the rate per cent, necessary to raise the taxes required for state purposes, as determined by the state board of equalization, and place the same upon the tax-rolls of the county. ’’ (The State, ex rel., v.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State ex rel. Dawes v. BaileySupreme Court of Kansas · 1895
- Bergman v. BullittSupreme Court of Kansas · 1890
3Cited by2 opinions
- Meservey v. GullifordIdaho Supreme Court · 1908
- Shail v. CroxfordIdaho Supreme Court · 1934