Hunt v. Gardner
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Woodruff Chancery Court. The tax sale was regular in all things and valid. 55 Ark. 218; 68 Ark. 248. The certificate was not placed on the record before ’ the day of sale, and the sale is therefore void. Black. Tax T. § 214.. Jurisdictional facts must affirmatively appear of record. 55 Ark. 30, 218; 51 Ark. 34.
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, J.
Appellee sues to cancel, as a cloud upon his title to certain lands, a deed executed to appellant by the county clerk pursuant to a sale by the collector for taxes.
The validity of the tax sale is challenged upon the ground that the clerk failed to record and certify before the day of sale the published list of lands to be sold, as required by law. The statute in question is as follows: “The clerk of the county court shall record said list and notice in a book to be by’him kept for the purpose, and shall certify at the foot of said record, stating in what newspaper said list was published, and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Logan v. Eastern Arkansas Land Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1900
3Cited by18 opinions
- Magness v. HarrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Cecil v. Tisher and FriendSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
- Cook v. Ziff Colored Masonic Lodge No. 119Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Hewett v. Ozark White Lime Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Alphin v. BanksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1937
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.